
Book- 



SERIES OF LETTERS 



ADDRESSED TO THE ~ 

METHODIST CONNECTION, 

Explaining the important Doctrines of Justification by 
Faith, arid the Direct Witness of the Spirit, as taught 
by the Preachers of that Body ; and vindicating these 
Doctrines from the Misrepresentations and erroneous 
Conclusions of the Rev. Melville Horxe, Minister 
of Christ Church, Macclesfield, in five Letters, written 
by that Gentleman, and entitled, " An Investigation 
of the Definition of Justifying Faith, the Damnatory 
Clause under which it is enforced, and the Doctrine of a 
Direct Witness of the Spirit, held by Dr. Coke, and 
other Methodist Preachers/' 

BY THOMAS COKE, LL. D. 

OF THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD. 

44 They know a little, presume a great deal, and so jump to 
" conclusions." Locke. 



LTO N : 

AND TO BE HAX W*"T&fe fc£V; 1*ftt. TSXANCHARD, 



04, ClT^'ROA^g 



i 



A Paris, Printer, Tcok's Court, 



I 



PREFACE. 



IN the course of our ministry, it has been our 
lot to meet with much opposition ; but whether this 
has retarded or accelerated our progress, it may be 
somewhat difficult to determine. The attacks w hich 
have been made upon us have assumed a variety of 
forms ; we have been assailed from opposite quarters ; 
and have been compelled to encounter the expostu- 
lations of those who profess to be our friends, as 
w r ell as the hostilities of such as have declared them- 
selves our foes. 

If w-e look back to the commencement of Metho- 
dism, and trace its annals to the present time, we 
shall find, that there is scarcely any offence, to which 
the least plausibility could be annexed, with which 
we have not been charged. Our motives, our 
conduct, our doctrines, our ceconomy, have all been 
examined w ith an excess of rigour, and the eye of 
prejudice has seen much to reprehend, and the tongue 
of calumny found much to condemn, in all. As to 
our motives, they* have been deemed base, selfish, 



u 



PREF A C L . 



and sinister in an extreme. Otir conduct has been 
represented as scliisniatical and enthusiastic ; and 
there is scarcely an article in the black catalogue of 
heresy, with which our doctrines have not been 
loaded. In this common cry, men of jarring senti- 
ments have exerted their talents. It has been a cen- 
tral point of union among them ; so that those who 
could agree in nothing besides, have strangely con- 
curred in this, that Methodism must be wrong, and 
that every one has a right to traduce it in his own 
way. 

But amidst the whole, Methodism has continued 
to prosper. The life and power of godliness are 
found among her converts, more so, perhaps, than 
among those of any other people. Thousands every 
year have been turned from darkness to light. Her 
doctrines have been blessed to the conversion of mul- 
titudes, whose experience concurs with scripture and 
reason, to establish their importance and authen- 
ticity. Methodism has been owned and blessed of 
God in a peculiar manner. And the reformation 
that is visible in various parts of this land, where 
it has been established, is so conspicuous, that every 
unprejudiced spectator must allow, that it has in- 
troduced a striking revolution in the morals of the 
community. 4 



PREFACE. 



hi 



That Methodism, instrumental as it has been in 
the production of such happy effects, as its most 
violent opposers have scarcely the hardihood to deny, 
should still be the subject of opposition, may seem 
exceedingly strange* But strangeness in theory can 
never counteract fact. Hostility seems to follow it 
like a shadow. The animadversions, however, which 
are made on our conduct, are of little consequence. 
This is open to public inspection ; and with those 
who have an opportunity of observing it, can suffer 
nothing from attack. But w 7 ith our doctrines the 
case is widely different. Few of our opponents, 
comparatively speaking, have leisure to examine 
them in all their branches and bearings ; and fewer 
still are inclined to take the trouble of comparing 
them with the standard of unerring truth. It is 
through the representations that are made of them 
by others, that they are more generally viewed ; and 
the public mind is not unfrequently influenced by a 
decision which is not its own. 

As nothing less than misrepresentations are to be 
expected from an avowed hostility towards us, we 
wait their arrival without much emotion, and stand 
upon our guard. But when, under the mask of 
friendship, our , doctrines are placed in an inauspicious 
light, our ministerial labours traduced, and we are 



PREFACE. 



charged with a dereliction of principle, of which we 
are wholly unconscious, we feel ourselves compelled 
by justice and duty to appear in our own defence. 
These traducements and charges have lately been 
brought both against our doctrines and ourselves, by 
the Rev. Melville Home, of Macclesfield, in five 
- Letters, the title of which has been already given. 

The doctrines which are professedly investigated 
by Mr. H. are certainly of the last importance to 
mankind. They include all that can be dear to an 
aw akened mind ; pervading at once the cause, condi- 
tion, and nature of our justification before God, and 
those qualifications which are necessary for our enjoy- 
ment of an eternal inheritance. On these momen- 
tous topics, Mr. H. conceives that Mr. Wesley, in 
his early days, entertained some erroneous opinions ; 
but that after some years he totally relinquished 
them; — that he adopted others which were more 
orthodox ;— and that in the belief of these he died : 
' — That his followers, less discriminating, or more 
injudicious than himself, have abandoned what he 
reformed; — re-adopted what he discarded ;— ~misun« 
der stood their common creed, and continue to the 
present moment to propagate error, from a delusive 
persuasion that it is truth. 

Charges so unfounded, can only hope to obtain 



PREFACE, v 

credit where tlie controverted doctrines, are un- 
known. And even with those who partially admit 
these pointed accusations, success must he more 
indebted to the peremptory tone in which they are 
made, than to the keenness of the argumentation by 
which they are supported. In many places, Mr. 
Home's charges on the Author are personal and 
acrimonious ; so that, if retaliation were a virtue, 
they would demand from him an asperity of lan- 
guage, which is both hostile to his inclinations, and 
irreconcilable with his professional character. To 
such conduct, therefore, he hopes he shall not descend. 

These, however, -are considerations which he views 
as unimportant, and of little weight. It is possible, 
nevertheless, that Mr. Home's book may fall into 
the hands of some whom the specious appearance 
of his observations and extracts may deceive. And 
these extracts will be the more likely to impose on 
the unwary; by being taken from the writings of Mr. 
Wesley and Mr. Fletcher, and delivered in nearly 
their own words ; while the connexions from which 
they have been broken, have been cautiously con- 
cealed. 

To pass over, in total silence, conduct so justly 
reprehensible, would be in a measure to plead 
guilty to the charges exhibited. It might be construed 



Vi 



PREFACE. 



into an acknowledgment that our doctrines were not 
defensible : it might encourage others to augment 
the number of false accusations, from a full per- 
suasion that they should escape with impunity ; and 
induce our enemies to triumph, in the discovery of 
heresies which never existed but in their own imagi- 
nations. On the contrary, to notice every paragraph 
•with a specific reply ; — to descend to all the 
minutiae of involuntary error, or inconsiderate misre- 
presentation^ and trace each branch to its cause and 
consequences, would be to impose respect on a book 
tyhkh had forfeited all title to honourable regard. 

These opposite considerations have induced the 
Author to pursue a middle pa|h between these tw r o 
extremes ; so that, without implicitly submitting to 
either, he might derive an advantage from both, and 
turn his attention more immediately to the doctrines 
in question. By adopting this method, he is furnished 
with an opportunity of stating at large, the real 
sentiments of those venerable men, who honoured 
him with their friendship while living, and whose 
memory he reveres now they are dead ; and of 
placing before the reader some of the arguments by 
which those doctrines are supported, and which, as 
Methodists, we mutually embrace. In doing this, 
lie trusts, that while he glances obliquely at the 



PREFACE. 



Vll 



debate, and makes a few excursions into the field 
of controversy, he pursues a more important object: 
To elucidate and defend the leading doctrines of 
the gospel, rather than to repel the charges and 
insinuations of Mr. Home, has been the Author's 
primary motive. If, therefore, he has been suc- 
cessful in his efforts ; as truth, from its own nature, 
is immutable, these Letters, he hopes,, may be 
perused with advantage, when he shall be able to 
write no more. 



T. COKE, 



spe 



j shed 



CONTENTS. 



LETTER % 

SUBJECT of inquiry, Dishonourable expressions used 
by Mr. Home. Doctrines and persons that he 
attacks. Connexion of supposed facts imputed to 
Mr. Wesley, invented by Mr. Home, — proved by an 
appeal to Mr. Wesley's sermons. Passage which has 
given Mr. H. offence, not connected with justifying, 
but with the full christian faith. The standard of 
christian perfection not raised too high by Mr. Wes- 
ley, acknowledged by Mr. Home. Mr. W. vindicated 
from the charge of renouncing his definition of justify- 
ing faith. Definition defended against preliminary 
assaults. Definition stated at large, in Mr, Wesley's 
own words. Faith operates prospectively and retro- 
spectively. Definition briefly explained. Copy of 
Mr. Wesley's letter, which Mr. H. produces to prove 
that he did renounce his definition. Reply to 
Mr. Home's animadversions. Letter proved not to 
be inconsistent with the definition. Detached 
passages controverted. Quotation from Dr. Paley. 

Page 1. 

LETTER It 

This Letter contains answers to the following questions : 
What is justification? What, under the gospel dispen- 
sation, is necessary on the part of man, in order to 



CONTEXTS. 



justification ? What must a penitent believe ift 
order to justification ? Venturing on Christ illus* 
trated by a simile. Repentance and conversion shown 
to be distinct from each other. Eight objections stated 
and answered. What is justifying faith? Does justi- 
fying faith bring with it any specific evidence i Is this 
evidence known ? Are all those who are awakened by 
the Spirit of God at the same time genuine believers 
in Jesus Christ ? &c. p. 5%* 

LETTER III. 

Observations on detached passages of Mr. Home's 
second letter, proving that neither Mr, John 
nor Mr. Charles Wesley entertained those views for 
which Mr. H. contends. Note on Mr. Home's 
personal reflections. Mr. Wesley's views of justify- 
ing faith proved to have remained unaltered to the 
time of his death. Mr. Home's remarks controverted. 
Survey of the four grand dispensations of the gospel, 
from Mr. Fletcher. The distinction between a 
servant and a child of God, proved to arise from the 
nature of these dispensations. Objects of justifying 
faith different, under different dispensations. Mr. 
Home's objections to the distinction between servant 
and child proved to be fallacious. Mr. Wesley a babe 
in Christ when he went to America to preach the 
gospel. Citation from Mr, Benson, proving that the 
Spirit of adoption is connected with justification. 
Faith proved not to be a negative, but an active 
principle. What constitutes a babe in Christ. Mr. 
Hornjes severe charges inapplicable to us. p. 123» 



CONTENT*. 



LETTER IV. 

Anal}' sis of Mr. Fletchers Essay on Truth. Doc- 
trines inculcated in this Essay varied by Mr. Fletcher, 
according to his views of the various dispensations of 
the Gospel. These doctrines erroneously applied by- 
Mr. Home. Mr. Fletcher's sentiments in this Essay 
vindicated from Mr. Home's misapplication of them. 
Letter written by Mr. Wesley to Mr. Morgan in 
1768, expressly disowning and rejecting these doc- 
trines which Mr. Home contends that Mr. Wesley 
did embrace in 1747- Christian dispensation more 
exalted than any which preceded it. Doctrine of 
Mr. Fletchers Essay on Truth perfectly consistent 
with the doctrines that the Methodists now inculcate. 

p. 189. 

LETTER V. 

Review and vindication of an Article written by 
Mr. Marsden, and published in the Methodist Maga- 
zine. Subject of the present letter. General outlines 
of Mr. Home's hypothesis stated. Instance of its 
fallacy. Hypothesis examined. To be a christian, 
something more than to be a mere penitent. Rege- 
neration distinct from repentance. That faith which 
is only general, not justifying. Acceptance accom- 



C0:*T2NT5, 



panicd with a knowledge of it. Faith an intuitive 
principle, and must, therefore, bring with it its own 
internal evidence. Hypothesis calculated to lead to 
manv pernicious effects and consequences, twenty-two 
of which are pointed out. Hypothesis contrasted with 
experience. Contrasted with scripture, and proved to 
be inconsistent with the declarations of our Lord and 
his Apostles. p. 249- 

LETTER VI. 

Mr. Home's definition of justifying faith stated and 
examined, and proved to be inapplicable to the thing 
professedly defined. Faith cannot be wholly detached 
from assurance. Principles of the hypothesis unmer- 
ciful. Mr. Home's erroneous views of a direct wit- 
ness of the Spirit stated. Silence of scripture no 
basis for argument. Witness of our own spirit, and 
of the Spirit of adoption stated in Mr. Wesley's words. 
Direct witness defined ; reasons why it never can be 
proved to be impossible. Various scriptures and argu- 
ments adduced, to prove both the necessity and cer- 
tainty of a direct witness. Some of Mr. Home's 
leading positions and arguments against a direct wit- 
ness examined. Conclusion.' p. 311. 



SERIES 
IETTERSi 



LETTER I. 

BELOVED BRETHREN, . 

The articles of our creed, which Mr. Home 
has thought proper to call in question, are, Mr, 
Wesley's definition of justifying faith; a passage 
that occurs in one of his sermons, which enforces 
the necessity of a qualification for glory ; and his 
opinion on the direct witness of the Spirit. Against 
each of these he brings many ill-directed argu- 
ments; and does not fail to scatter through his 
pages an abundance of illiberal epithets, which 
might have been spared, and from which his little 
volume can hope to derive few lasting honours.* 

* Of these dishonourable expressions you will be able 
to form some idea, from the following specimen* whicli 

B 



2 



On Mr. Home's familiarity with " Moloch' it 
is not my design to animadvert. I liave only 

are selected from his book : 44 .An execrable damnatory 
44 clause." (p. 11. preface.) 44 The damnatory clause I 
44 gave cordially to the devil." {p. 2.) 44 Great reprobat- 
44 ing fiery Moloch of Methodism." (p. 12.) " Let the 
44 songs of assurance drown the cries of the wretched 
M babes burning to Moloch." (ibid.) 44 Cursed heads of 
44 the non-assured." (p. 13.) 44 The God of Methodist 
'« idolatry — a very Moloch, on whose bloody altars the 
44 firstlings of the church were to be cruelly butchered.' 1 
(p. 16.) 44 Devil-invented sin of non-assurance." (p. 31.) 
44 Satan's brats." (p. 38.) 44 Definition-men, with the 
44 damnatory clause in their hands." (ibid.) 44 Yea, per- 
44 haps, curse me by Moloch." (p. 40.) 44 What you will 
44 do with your damned penitents I don't know." (p. 41.) 
44 The devil should have his due." (ibid.) 44 All the dam- 
44 natory clauses of Definition-men/- (p. 42.) 44 Damnable 
sin of non-assurance." (p. 43.) 44 I loathe it as much 
44 as if the devil were to tell me, There is no God. "(ibid ) 
44 The devil will not receive these praying babes into hell." 
(ibid.) * 4 You cannot thrust them into hell." (ibid.) 44 De- 
44 vil-begotten sin of non-assurance." (p. 45.) 44 Dreadful 
44 vibrations of the damnatory clause, as the fiery blasts 
44 of the Simoon." (p. 46.) 44 Black rider of the damna- 
44 tory consequence." (ibid.) 44 Horrible decree." (p. 51.) 
44 Firm phalanx of the damnatory clause." (p. 53.) 44 They 
44 must smoke on Moloclrs altars." (ibid.) 44 Intolerable 
44 heat of the damnatory clause." (ibid.) 44 The damna- 
44 tory clause is mere brut urn fuhnen" (p. 58.) 44 Damn- 
44 able non-descript sin of non-assurance." (p. 62.) 
14 Damnatory clauses — detestable anathemas." (p. 63.) 
44 Accursed lie of the devil," (p# 69.) 44 Damnable non- 



5 



quoted these expressions as proofs of indiscretion 
and have endeavoured to exhibit them in such a 
light as may induce Mr. II. to deal out his disho- 
nourable terms in his future publications with a 
more sparing hand. 

The men, Mr. Home tells us, to whom his let* 
ters are addressed, are, " The Rev. Dr. Coke, and 
" such Methodist Preachers as, 1. Define justi- 
" fying faith to be, 6 A sure trust and confidence, 
" that a man hath in God, through Christ, that 
li his sins are forgiven, and he reconciled to the 
" favour of God.' % VTho preach that assurance, 
" under the pain of da-nnatxon^ to those who are 
" not so assured. 3* Who assert a direct witness 

<9 assurance, (ibid.) 44 Satanic sword of the damnatory 
44 clause." (p. 79.) 44 Damnatory doctrine of assurance." 
(ibid.) 44 Damnatory rider." (ibid.) 44 Satanic assurance. 75 
(p. 82.) 44 Chimerical sin of non-assurance." (p. 84*) 
v Diana definition." (p. 85.) 44 Damned unbeliever." 
(ibid.) " I credit your damnatory testimony as little as 
44 Mr. Wesley's." (ibid.) 44 Damnatory lightnings now 
played innoxious." (p. 8G.) U Definition and damna- 
'* tory clause." (ibid) 44 Methodist Diana." (p. 88 
f 4 Damned sincere penitents." (ibid.) ' % You damn all 
44 non-assured men, in the name of your reprobating 
44 Moloch." (p. 89.) 44 Great rs thy divinity, O Moloch." 
(p. 90.) 44 Damnatory Word." (p. 91) 44 Damnatory" 
44 rider." (p. 92.) 44 You stupify them ivith damnatory 
44 clauses." (p. 99.) 44 Cloven foot of the damnatory 
44 clause." (p. 103) " A damning proof." (p. Utt.$ 
*c. &c. 



4 



of the Spirit, testifying to those who have jus- 

* tifying faith, 6 Thou aft pardoned. Thou hast 
" redemption in his blood/ I grant, (he proceeds) 
" the Mr. Wesleys and first Methodists preached 
" these doctrines. The definition was adopted, 
" and avow r ed by r them. The damnatory clause 
" is in Mr. J. Wesley's sermon, The Almost 
u Christian, preached at St. Mary's, Oxford — ' The 
u God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who 
u now standeth in the midst of us, knoweth, that 
" if any man die without this faith, good were it 

* for him, that he had never been born." This 
" direct witness is asserted in his sermon on the 
" Witness of the Spine; and, in the Minutes of 
u Conference, A. D. 1 747, he affirms, The Spirit 
" witnesses, Thou art pardoned, fyt< (p. 1.) 

Nothing, I think, can be more obvious to a 
discerning reader, who views these subjects only 
through the representation of Mr. Home, than 
that the Mr. Wesley s, and first Methodists, con- 
nected together the above definition of justifying 
faith, and what he calls the " damnatory clause." 
His letters are addressed " to those who hold the 
" definition, and who preach that assurance, under 
« the pain of damnation, to those who are not so 
" assured;" and he grants, " that the Mr. Wesleys, 
" and first Methodists, preached these doctrines." 
And, finally, to prevent all mistakes in the con- 
nection, which he endeavours both to form and 
support, he has carefully distinguished, by Roman 



5 



and Italic letters, the words that, and so, and tMs, 
in order to cement more firmly together the various 
parts of that fabric which he insinuates Mr. Wes- 
ley erected, but which he is just about to de- 
molish. 

Thus far, no doubt, the language of Mr. Home 
is both clear and expressive ; but before we attend 
to the mighty ruin with which our ears are soon to 
be stunned, some previous questions must be de- 
termined. Did Mr. Wesley ever connect together, 
as Mr. H. has stated, his definition of justifying 
faith and the " damnatory clause ?" Has Mr. H. 
produced, either from Mr. Wesley's writings, or 
the acknowledged writings of any other among us, 
any evidence of such a connection? Can any 
such evidence be produced by him, that the words 
used by Mr. Wesley in this definition of justifying 
faith, are ever connected with the " damnatory 
" clause when they are exclusively confined to 
justification ? It is upon the decision of these 
questions that the import and application of his 
arguments must depend ; these are the data on 
which his reasonings rest. And should it appear 
that he has combined together, w^hat none of those 
whom he opposes had ever united, his own as- 
sumptions, which are the foundation of his book, 
must instantly forsake him ; the battery which he 
has erected must then immediately fall, and bury 
in the mighty ruins his tremendous artillery by 
which Methodism was to have been demolished. 



6 



To detennine these points, we must apply to 
Mr. Wesley's own language, and works ; and, by 
comparing what he has advanced with what Mr. 
Home has asserted, examine how far his state- 
ments have been correct, his connections accurate, 
and his inferences just. 

That Mr. Wesley did use the words which Mr. 
Home has quoted, in his common definition of 
justifying faith, I most readily admit. They are 
to be found in the y5th page of his first volume 
of sermons, in a sermon which he entitles " Justi- 
fication by faith: — in the early Minutes of Con- 
ference; — and, with some occasional variations, 
in many other parts of his voluminous works. 
But in most of these places they stand in connec- 
tion with other expressions, which cannot fail to 
elucidate their import, but which Mr. H. perhaps, 
for the sake of brevity, has entirely omitted. From 
what portion of Mr. W/s works he has selected 
the definition, it is impossible for me to say, as he 
has made no references to the place. But these 
omissions are of little consequence. The whole 
tenor of Mr. W/s works requires the connections 
which are passed over in silence; for, without these, 
he might stand justly charged with defining the 
faith of an Antinomian. 

But while Mr. H. has so evidently broken the 
definition from its proper connections, he has taken 
care that it should not stand alone. He has ap- 
plied to another sermon for an expression to supply 



tiie deficiency ; linked it to the definition, by ties 
which he would persuade his readers are indisso- 
luble ; and then raised an exclamation at the 
monster which his own indiscretion had formed. 
" The damnatory clause (he observes) is in Mr. J. 
u Wesley's sermon, The Almost Christian, preach- 
" ed at St. Mary's, Oxford." 

In. this sermon on the Almost Christian, from 
which Mr. H. has quoted the above passage, Mr. 
Wesley no where defines ■" justifying faith/' or 
particularly refers to it ; much less does he enforce 
it by the " damnatory clause," which Mr. H. has 
thus introduced to mount guard upon it. Instead 
of this, he contrasts, through the whole, the Al- 
most, with the Perfect Christian; and, without 
stopping to notice any particular doctrine so as to 
define it, introduces all the qualifications that are 
necessary to render the christian character com- 
plete. In this sermon, neither conviction, faith, 
justification, nor sanctification, is defined. The 
whole are insisted on as necessary to salvation; 
and what Mr. II. has denominated the " damna- 
" tory clause," amounts to no more than this — 
" We must be prepared for glory before we die, 
or good were it for us that we had never been 
born." But Mr. Wesley's own words will place 
this fact in a still more unquestionable light. 

Mr. Wesley, when addressing himself to his 
audience, thus speaks— " Are not many of you 
conscious, that you never came thus far ; that yon 



8 



havt not come up to the standard of heathen 
honesty ? At least not to the form of Christian 
godliness ? Much less hath God seen sincerity in 
you, a real design of pleasing him in all things. 
You never so much as intended to devote all your 
words, and works, your business, studies, diver- 
sions^ to his glory. You never even designed or 
desired, that whatsoever you did, should be done 
in the name of the Lord Jesus, and, as such, 
should be a spiritual sacrifice, acceptable to God 
through Christ. 

" But supposing you had, do good designs and 
good desires make a Christian ? By no means, 
unless they are brought to good effect. " Hell is 
paved, saith one, with good intentions." The 
great question of all then still remains, Is the love 
of God shed abroad in your heart? Canyon cry 
out 6 My God and my all r' Do you desire no- 
thing but him? Are you happy in God? Is he 
your glory, your delight, your crown of rejoicing ? 
And is this commandment written in your heart, 
that he who loveth God love his brother also ? 
Do you then love your neighbour as yourself? Do 
you love every man, even your enemies, even the 
enemies of God, as your own soul? As Christ 
loved you ? Yea, dost thou believe that Christ 
loved thee, and gave himself for thee? Hasfc 
thou faith in his blood : Believest thou the Lamb 
of God hath taken away thy sins, and cast them 
as a stone into the depth of the sear That he hath 



9 



blotted out the hand-writing that was against thee, 
taking it out of the way, nailing it to his cross ? 
Hast thou, indeed, redemption through his blood, 
even the remission of thy sins; and doth his Spirit 
bear witness with thy spirit that thou art a child 
of God ? 

" The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, 
who now standeth in the midst of us, knoweth 
that if any man die without this faith, and this 
love, good were it for him that he had never been 
born. Awake then thou that sleepest, and call 
upon God: call in the day when he may be found. 
Let him not rest, till he make his goodness to pass 
before thee, till he proclaim unto thee the name 
of the Lord, the Lord, the Lord God, merciful 
and gracious, long-suffering, and abundant in 
goodness and truth ; keeping mercy for thousands, 
forgiving iniquity, transgression, and sin. Let no 
man persuade thee by \yain words, to rest short of 
this prize of thy high calling. But cry unto him 
day and night, who, while we were without strength, 
died for the ungodly, until thou knowest in whom 
thou hast believed, and canst say, My Lord and 
my God. Remember always to pray, and not to 
faint, till thou canst lift up thy hand unto heaven, 
and declare to him that liveth for ever and ever, 
Lord, thou knowest all things, thou knowest that 
I love thee. May we all thus experience what it 
k to be not almost only, but altogether Christians !" 

Wesley's Sermons, vol, i. p. 31 — 33; 

33 5 



10 



Permit me now to ask — Is there any thing in 
the whole of this long quotation, that looks like a 
design either to define justification, or to enforce 
the definition of it? Are not several expressions 
indicative of the contrary? Did " the love of 
our enemies, even the enemies of God, as our own 
soul — as Christ loved us/' ever constitute any part 
of Mr.W.'s definition of justifying faith? And is not. 
the acquirement of this exalted grace, that which, 
among others, he presses all to seek? Nay, do not 
the words which occur in the obnoxious passage, 
as it is quoted by Mr. H. corroborate the same 
fact? And is it not most evident that they look 
forward to the christian's growth in grace; — to his 
having arrived at the unity of the faith, and of the 
knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect 
man, unto the measure of the stature of the ful- 
ness of Christ, instead of making the definition, 
which has been given of justifying faith, the in- 
fallible standard which all must reach before they 
can have a title to heaven? What, but this, are we 
to understand by these words — " If any man die 
without this faith, and this love ?" The previous 
passages evidently describe the qualification of a 
mature christian ; but do not at all define justifying 
faith, which is but one part of it. Why Mr. 
H. tore this passage, w hich he has called " the 
a damnatory clause," from its proper connection, 
and linked it with justifying faith, a doctrine 
which is no where defined in the sermon, m&f be 



11 

better known to himself than others. That this is 
done, appears most unquestionable, though the rea- 
sons for such conduct lie concealed ; and Mr. H. 
in his turn, is called upon for a vindication of his 
disingenuousness, " in the face of his country, and 
u of the church of Christ." 

Whether Mr. Wesley has raised the standard 
of Christian experience and perfection to too great 
a height, is quite another question. This we may 
hereafter examine. The utmost for which I con- 
tend at present is, that " the damnatory clause," 
as Mr. H. has been pleased to term it, did not 
draw the line betsveen a believer and an unbeliever, 
as it respects his justification, but between one 
that is meet for glory, and one that is not. This 
fact, I persuade myself, all will be able to perceive 
from the full quotation that I have already given 
from Mr. W.'s sermon, as it stands contrasted with 
the improper combinations which Mr. H. has 
made, and laid down as the foundation of his 
future charges. 

That the standard of Christian experience and 
perfection has not been raised too high ir he esti- 
mation of Mr. H. he more than indi n 9^ ac- 
knowledges. Referring to the time when \ie acted 
as a preacher among us, he observes as follows : 
" I believed and taught every thing you believe 
" and teach, not excepting christian perfection. 
" On the points in question, I taught what I 
" knew, and my hands had spiritually handled of 



12 



u the word of life. I preached justifying faith, as 
v the receiving the Lord Jesus as a Saviour in an 
fl humble, lowly, penitent, and obedient heart. I 
" preached assurance as an inevitable consequence 
" of faith, when the believer did understand that 
14 his so receiving Christ was justifying faith: but 
" that so long as he did not ascertain the nature 

of his faith, he would not have assurance, though 
44 he felt the saving power of faith by peace with 
" God, and victory over sin, death, and hell. I 
44 preached the witness of the Spirit, peace, love, 
44 joy, and every good fruit, abundantly shed 
" abroad in the heart by the Holy Ghost gives 
'A unto us, and producing the most luminous and 
a indubitable assurance." (p. 2.) 

In these passages Mr. H. most evidently joins 
with us in supporting that standard of christian 
perfection, which Mr. W. had previously raised. 
He admits our approaches towards it as an inevi- 
table consequence of faith, in all who can under- 
stand the nature of their faith; but doubts whether 
the nature of this justifying faith, upon which 
both a c irance and perfection depend, can be as- 
certd^ eS 7 by all. He allows justification to be by 
faith in the Son of God; and that those who 
possess its saving power enjoy " peace with God, 
and victory over sin, death, and hell;" and yet 
doubts whether we may not at the same time be 
wholly ignorant of the nature of that faith, by 
which we are united to the source from whence 



13 



these blessings flow, and totally destitute of those 
inward evidences by which justifying faith may be 
distinguished ! 

To prove that Mr. Wesley did actually renounce 
his general definition of justifying faith, together 
with " the damnatory clause, which," he savs, 
" is as decently involved in it, as reprobation m 
" Calvinistic election," (though I have proved, 
from Mr. W.'s own words, that it was transplanted 
by Mr. H. into the soil in which it now grows) he 
proceeds to adduce evidence. His first appeal is 
made to a private conversation which he had with 
Mr. W. about three years prior to his death, to 
whom he proposed his doubts on the propriety c f 
" the definition," and the " damnatory clause," 
in question. " The venerable man," says Mr. 11. ? 
" heard me with visible satisfaction, requested me 
" to write my experience for the magazine, and 
u added these memorable words, \ When, fifty 
" years ago, my brother Charles and I, in the 
" simplicity of our hearts, told the good people of 
" England, that unless they knew their sins for- 
" given, they were under the wrath and curse of 
" God, I marvel, Mellville, they did not stone 
u us. The Methodists, I hope, know better now : 
u we preach assurance as we always did, as a 
u common privilege of the children of God; but 
" we do not enforce it, under the pain .of damn- 
u ation, denounced on aU who enjoy it not*" 
<P>3,) 



14 



The faithfulness of this citation it would be rude 
to dispute. I will admit the fact, but must still 
deny the inference which Mr. H. attempts to draw 
from it; namely, that Mr, W. had renounced his 
definition of justifying faith, and wholly rejected 
a the damnatory clause." I have already shewn, 
from Mr. W.'s ownlansfuao'e, that " the damnatory 
" clause" was not connected by him with justify- 
ing, but with perfect christian faith, as including 
every grace of the Spirit; and that in this light only 
it can hold any relation to the definition. But were 
I to grant Mr. H. all he could desire, namely, that 
the definition did apply to justifying faith, and that 
the obnoxious clause was by Mr. TV . brought forth 
to enforce it, still I must contend that in Mr. W/s 
verbal reply to Mr. H. there was no dereliction of 
principle. The utmost that can be inferred is, that 
Mr. W. instructed by experience, was grown more 
wary- in his public addresses, and that he adapted 
the mode of his preaching to the condition of 
those who heard. His manner, he acknowledged 
to have altered, but not his matter. For he ob- 
served to Mr. H., " We preach assurance as we 
u always did ;" but this he could not have said, if this 
doctrine had undergone any change, in his own 
estimation. Is this, I would ask, the language of 
a man who was recanting error: Do these words 
convey a tacit renunciation of any principle r 

I am well aware, that Mr. H. may accuse me of 
vindicating Mr. W/s consistency at the expenct 



15 



of his integrity. But surely he needs not be told ? 
that the omission of many truths before uncon- 
verted and prejudiced congregations, is not a dere- 
liction of them. It is not every thing that is law- 
ful, which is expedient. Nay, we are expressly 
commanded not to cast our pearls before swine, 
lest they turn again and rend us. (Matt. vii. 6.) 
And even babes in Christ are to be fed with milk, 
and not with strong meat, because they are not 
able to bear it, (1 Cor. iii. 2.) Therefore, every 
scribe which is instructed unto the kingdom of 
heaven, is like unto a man that is an householder, 
which bringeth forth out of his treasure, thing© 
new and old. (Matt. xiii. 52.) 

From this extraordinary confession of Mr. W., 
in which he acknowledges that he had seen reason^ 
to adopt some alterations in the manner of enforc- 
ing his doctrine, while " he preached assurance as 
he always did," Mr. H. makes a general appeal 
to Mr. Fletcher's Essay on Truth, and expresses 
much astonishment at the discoveries which he 
made. " I now again read the Essay on Truth, 
" and was surprised I had not before clearly no- 
ct ticed, that Mr. Fletcher and Mr. Wesley had, at 
u least, in the year 1774, explicitly and publicly re- 
u jected the damnatory clause, and consequently the 
" definition, which is as decently involved in it, as 
u reprobation in calvinistic election." (p. 3.) 
'This Essay on Truth, I shall hereafter examine, 
when proceeding to survey those pages in which 
Mr. H. professes to analyze its parts. 



16 



From these general observations on Mr. Fletcher's 
Essay on Truth, in which Mr. H. seems to bespeak 
a favourable hearing of his readers, he refers us to 
Dr. Whitehead's life of Mr. Wesley. In this work, 
he tells us, he was " amazed to find, from an 
" authentic document, what he never had sus- 
" pected: namely, that so early as the year 1747, 
" Mr. Wesley had fairly relinquished the defmi- 
<c tion, and the damnatory consequence involved 
* in it: and still more so, to learn from Dr. 
** Whitehead, that he had been earnestly request- 
u ed to suppress that document." (p. 3.) Why this 
request should be made to Dr. Whitehead is ob* 
vious. It was apprehended by several, that the 
less discriminating, unable either to trace the ana- 
logy between the explanatory phrases of this paper 
and Mr. W/s more publicly received language, or 
to make due allowances for its exceptive clauses, 
would seize it as a favourable occasion to charge 
him with inconsistency, and then triumph in the 
fancied dereliction which their want of penetration 
had enabled them to discover. These considera- 
tions, however, had no influence. Dr. Whitehead 
persisted in publishing the document; and Mr. TI. 
has proved, that the apprehensions of those who 
requested him to suppress it, were not altogether 
unfounded. 

From this document, which Dr. Whitehead has 
preserved, Mr. H. applies to a review of Mr, 
Joseph Cook's book, in the Methodist Magazine 



17 



for September 1807 ? and quotes from thence two 
definitions of justifying faith. These differ, indeed, 
from each other in words, but in import they are 
radically the same ; as the reader may perceive 
from the following copy : " In the first Conference 
held by Mr. Wesley, it was asked, what is faith r" 
Answer*. " Faith, in general, is a divine, super- 
natural htyxo$ (conviction or demonstration) of 
things not seen; L e. of past, future, or Bpiritual 
things: it is a spiritual sight of God, and the 
things of God. First, a sinner is convinced by 
the Holy Ghost, Christ ■ loved me, and gave him- 
self for me/ This is the faith, by which he is 
justified, or pardoned. Immediately the same 
Spirit bears witness, * Thou art pardoned. Thou 
hast redemption in his blood/ And this is saving 
faith, whereby the love of God is shed abroad in 
the heart." But justifying faith, he most com* 
monly defined in the language of the church of 
England, ( A sure trust and confidence which a 
man hath in God, that, through the merits of 
Christ, his sins are forgiven, and he reconciled to 
the favour of God/ (p. 6.) 

To annihilate both of these definitions, Mr, H, 
resorts to distinct measures; the former he under- 
takes to overturn ; and to the latter he opposes the 
document which Dr, Whitehead has preserved ; 
and infers from thence, that the sentiments of these 
are hostile to each other; and that the definition, 
which is delivered in nearly the words of the chucrk 



18 



of England, must retire before the document, 
" For the present," he observes, " I confine myself 
" to the humble task of overthrowing the one de- 
" finition, and of delivering the other into the 
" hands of Mr. Wesley to grind it to powder." 
(p. 70 Mr. IT. then proceeds as follows : " De- 
" finitions should include whatever is essential to< 
" the subject, and exclude what is incompatible 
a with it. Under the light of this observation, . 
u let us examine the first definition, which is 
" stated to be ' a conviction of the Spirit, that 
u Christ loved me, and gave himself for me/ 
" L I denv that any conviction of the Spirit i& 
u an act of faith. & In the above definition is 
u included nothing of the primary idea of faith, 
" which is to b elite e in Christ, to receive him, trust 
" in him, come to him, follow him, kiss the Sm f . 
" take hold on him, submit to him, fyc. fyc. The 
* definition is, therefore, radically defective." (p. 8.) 

. Surely Mr. H. must feel himself superior to the 
quibble on which his first objection is -founded.. 
iS o man can suppose that a conviction is -an act of 
faith in the most literal sense. In receiving a con- 
viction in my mind, I am nothing more than a 
passive subject: the active agency must reside in - 
another; and nothing can be more absurd than to 
suppose, that in this sense, conviction is an act of 
faith. Every unprejudiced mind must certainly 
understand Mr. Wesley in a different manner. 
And the obvious import of his words is, that 



19 



n justifying faith arises from an inward persuasion 
or conviction wrought in the mind by the Spirit 
of God." Now if a conviction or persuasion thus 
wrought in the mind be not the radical ground or 
origin of faith, how, I would ask, can 6 faith be 
f of, the operation of God/ as the apostle assures 
us that it is? (Col. ii. 12.) That any conviction 
wrought in the mind is " an act of faith," the 
definition does not assert. This is an association 
of ideas of Mr, TI/s own invention; and as it 
affects not us, he may still continue to wage war 
with the chimera. 

Secondly, Mr. H. observes, 4i in the above defU 
H tion is included nothing of the primary idea of 
" faith, which is to believe in Christ, to receive 
** him, trust in him, come to him," Sic. How 
he can reconcile this stricture with the definition 
on which he animadverts, it is hard to sav. Is 
there no believing in Christ included in a persua- 
sion that " he loved me and gave himself for me?" 
Is there no trusting in him, no receiving him, on 
whom the soul places reliance, while conscious of 
his love? That the definition does not descend to 
all the minutiae of explication, I readily admit;, 
but that it is radically defective, or includes any 
thing that is incompatible with justifying faith, are 
positions for which I have no other evidence than. 
Mr. Home's positive assertions. 

Conscious that this part of Mr. W.*s definition, 
in which he asserts, " Christ loved me, and gave 



so 



himself forme;" would rise above his criticism*, 
Mr. H. thus pursues his animadversions. " Thai 
u Christ loved me with general philanthropy, and 
u gave, himself for me, i 'firmly believe; but how 
" does this prove ; ' \ . _ he now accepts me as a be- 
* liever, and that, as such, he now loves me with 
H peculiar covenant dfeUghtf'.' (p. 8.) I answer, 
Such proof was never pretended, neither is it 
wanted.. But how does Mr. H. prove that the 
u love of Christ/' of which Mr. TV . speaks, did 
mean a love of philanthropy, and not that of cc* 
venant delight? Did the premises lead him to thU 
conclusion; Bv no means. On the contrary, in 
many places of Mr. Wesley's works, where the 
same expression occurs, the word " me*, is placed 
in italics, that we might learn from the peculiar 
emphasis which he laid upon it, that not a general 
love of benevolence or philanthropy was meant by 
him, but that of covenant delight. And as such 
Mr. H. might have observed it in page Qoth of 
that very edition of Mr. W.'s se.mons which he 
quotes. In short, Mr. W, more generally defines 
the faith by which a believer realizes his justifica- 
tion, than that by which the sinner comes to 
Christ- for pardon; and denominates it to be " jus- 
tifvins: faith" from the evidences which it affords. 
His letter to his brother, which we shall soon exa- 
mine, maybe considered, in part, as an , exception 
to these observations^ 



21 



Among other articles which constitute the pri- 
mary idea of faith, Mr. H. tells us, we must 
" follow Christ, and submit to him." Surely he 
will not coolly assert, that to " follow Christ," does 
in reality constitute any part whatever of genuine 
faith, much less the most radical idea of it? Did 
the multitudes who followed Christ in order to 
behold his miracles, possess the radical principle 
of faith? Did those who sought him, not for his 
miracles, but because they did. eat of the loaves 
and were filled, possess what constitutes the pri- 
mary idea of faith? The idea conveyed by the 
term, to follow, expresses the action, but does not 
develop the motive; it no more implies faith, than 
it does unbelief ; and primarily has no more con- 
nection with love, than it has with hatred. It 
therefore is totally inapplicable, and never can, 
suggest to our minds the primary idea of faith. 
Neither does the term, " submit to him/' appear 
to be more happily selected. Submission, indeed, 
acknowledges power, and the exercise of domi- 
nion, even "where the right is questionable, and 
the yoke unpleasant. The world which lieth in 
the wicked one, are the willing servants of Satan, 
and submit to him without reluctance: but who 
will assert, that by so doing they prove that their 
obedience constitutes the primary idea of any faith 
whatever ? But, where the principle of obedience 
is pure, and directed only to God, it is an effect 
that results from faith, rather than a branch of its 



/ 



22 

essence; and in no case can it constitute -any pan 
of its primary idea. 

The second definition of justifying faith, which 
Mr. Wesley has given in nearly the words- of the 
established church, Mr. H. seems disposed to treat 
with more tenderness. In a subsequent page, he 
indulges himself with an exclamation on the use* 
to which it has been applied ; but as the soil in 
which it originally grew is venerable, both from 
antiquity and authority, it happily escapes the 
lashes of severity. " Alas, little did blessed Cran- 
u mer, Ridley, and Latimer, who quenched the 
" violence of lire, by the faith of the Son of God, 
" little did they dream, that their inaccurate de- 

finition, was to be made the god of Methodist 
" idolatry, a very Moloch, on whose bloody altars, 
" the firstlings of the church were to be cruelly 
" butchered. When this definition, which in the 
u face looks as meek as a lamb, opens its dam- 
46 natory mouth, it roars like the old dragon/' (p. 16.) 
Such are Mr. Home's sentiments on the definition 
of faith which the Church of England has esta- 
blished, and which Mr. Wesley had adopted from 
her Homilies. Its final dissolution is, however, 
predicted to be near at hand, as it is immediately 
" to be delivered" into the hands of Mr. Wesley 
" to grind it to powder." 

From these preliminary strictures, expostulations^ 
reprehensions, and censures, Mr. H. proceeds to in- 
roduce Mr.Wesley's letter to his brother, to whieh 



c j3 



behave already alluded: not,indeed,with any design 
to reconcile his observations with the definitions he 
had previously given, to view them as bearing on 
another branch of faith, or to consider them in the 
light of exceptions to language which generally 
conveyed his thoughts ; but to place them in 
direct opposition to his more voluminous works, 
to prove, from the apparent contrast, that he did 
abandon his previous principles, and from thence 
affording room for others to infer his inconsistency. 
I will not attribute this conduct to any impro- 
per motive, neither will 1 dispute his right to adopt 
this method. I am willing to admit the purity of 
his designs ; but 1 must be allowed to express my 
own inadequacy to discover in this place either the 
warmth of his friendship, or his great veneration 
for the man whom he thus arraigns, by the conduct 
that he pursues. 

But be these motives what they may, the fact it- 
self is most unquestionable ; and, on this ground, it 
is a point of importance, in the present inquiry, to 
know whether Mr. H. lias been successful or un- 
successful in his attempts ? To determine this, we 
must once more recur to Mr. W/s definition of 
justifying faith, that we may have a fair opportu- 
nity of comparing it with the letter with which Mr. 
H. has contrasted it ; " a letter/' he says^ " which 
" evinces what I produced it to prove, that Mr. 
u Wesley did renounce the definition as applying 
" to justifying faith, as well as the damnatory 



24 



c; clause/' (p. 24.) That this "damnatory clause 5 * 
was ever connected by Mr. W. with justifying faith, 
is a point, as I have already observed, which yet 
remains for Mr. H. to prove. From Mr. W.'s own 
Avorks, in which the offensive passage occurs, it has 
already been made to appear, that it did not stand 
in connection with justifying faith; and, conse- 
quently, no room could be left for the renunciation 
which Mr. H. conceives he has discovered. This 
point will be further confirmed by some future 
considerations; but we now proceed to state at 
large Mr. Wesley's definition. 

" Justifying faith, implies not only a divine evi- 
dence or conviction that God was in Christ recon- 
ciling the world unto himself, but a sure trust and 
confidence that Christ died for my sins, that he 
loved me, and gave himself for me. And at what 
time soever a sinner thus believes, be it in early 
childhood, in the strength of his years, or when 
he is old and hoary-haired, God justifieth that un* 
godly one : God, for the sake of his Son, pardon- 
eth and absolveth him who had in him till 
then no good thing. Repentance, indeed, God 
had given him before: but that repentance 
was neither more nor less than a deep sense of the 
want of all good, and the presence of all evil. 
And whatever good he hath, or doth, from that hour, 
faith does not find but bring. This is the fruit of 
faith. First the tree is good, and then the fruit i« 
good also. 



25 



" I cannot describe the nature of this faith bet* 
ter, than in the words of our own Church, ' The 
only instrument of salvation, whereof justification 
is one branch, is faith ; that is, a sure trust and 
confidence that God both hath, and will forgive 
our sins, that he hath again accepted us into his fa- 
vour, for the merits of Christ's death and passion. 
But here we must take heed that we do not halt 
with God through an inconstant, wavering faith. 
Peter coming to Christ upon the water, because he 
fainted in faith, was in danger of drowning* So 
we, if we begin to waver or doubt, it is to be feared, 
that we should sink as Peter did, not into the wa- 
ter, but into the bottomless pit of hell-fire, (Se- 
cond Sermon on the Passion.") 

Wesley's Sermons, vol. i. p. 95. 

In this definition, it must be obvious to all, that 
no description is expressly given of that particular 
act of faith through which the sinner comes to, and 
ventures on, Jesus Christ. It would be erroneous, 
however, to conclude, that this was not to be un- 
derstood, because the definition descriptively ap- 
plies to that act by which he receives a sense of his 
acceptance, and knows that he is reconciled to God 
through the death of his Son. The former is ne- 
vertheless evidently implied > because the greater 
comprehends the less, and because the completion 
of an action always includes its commencement and 
progressive stages. This must be invariably under- 
stood in Mr. WVs definition of justifying faith, 

c 



26 

For nothing can be more absurd, than to suppose 
a belief of my being accepted, can be the condition 
of my acceptance. And it would be offering an 
insult both to his memory and understanding to 
imagine that this was intended by him. 

Indeed, the language which he uses on this oc- 
casion, clearly directs us to the previous act of 
faith through which we come to Christ; for he de- 
scribes it to be u a sure trust and confidence that 
God both hath and will forgive our sins." The 
words, " will forgive/' have plainly a future aspect, 
and evidently refer to a future blessing, which must 
be received by a future act, and never can be iden- 
tified with acts and blessings that are already past. 
The prospective act is therefore as strongly implied 
as the retrospective is expressed, and nothing but 
the utmost violence can force upon his words an 
opposite meaning. Nay, in this branch of the ex- 
pression, the act of faith by which we venture on 
Christ for salvation, is more strongly marked than 
the retrospective one, to which the definition more 
apparently applies. This may be gathered from 
the verb " forgive," which, though perfectly agree- 
ing with " will/* can never be made to coalesce 
with " hath." The quickness of Mr. Wesley's un- 
derstanding introduced into all his writings a de- 
gree of brevity which was peculiar to himself; but 
this brevity, while it expressed much, frequently 
involved his observations in obscurity. The man- 
ner of his expression in the passage before us, mos t 



undoubtedly required, in order to preserve the* 
grammatical construction of the sentence, that it 
should be " hath forgiven", and " will forgive. 0 
This circumstance, I consider as decisive in favour 
of the prospective act of faith, and clearly proves 
that this is included in his definition* 

From these terms which Mr. Wesley has used 
in his definition of justifying faith, " that God both 
hath and will forgive our sins," it is obvious, that 
in his view, when analyzed and reduced to its most 
simple state, it must consist of two parts; or, at 
least, have distinct operations. The first of these 
acts is, that by which we come to Christ for pardon, 
and the second is that by which we receive in our 
own souls a persuasion that we have obtained his 
favour. Of these acts the former may be denomi- 
nated the direct, and the latter the reflex, act of jus- 
tifying; faith. The former is begotten bv aoersua- 
sioii that he will pardon, and the latter by a per- 
suasion that he hath done it. These two modes of 
operation are inseparably connected together ; and, 
taken in conjunction, fully constitute that faith 
which justifies. To separate the parts would be 
to nullify the whole, and would prevent those 
happy effects from taking place which purify the 
heart. Hence, the man who would satisfy himself 
with the former without the latter, represents one 
who seeks, but does not find,— asks, but does not 
receive, — knocks, but has not the door opened; and, 
consequently, can neither enjoy peace, feel the love 



28 



©f God shed abroad in his heart, nor rejoice in the 
God of his salvation. And he, on the contrary, 
who expects the latter without the former, vainly 
hopes to receive without asking, to find without 
seeking, to realize blessings which he never de- 
sired ; and, without venturing by faith on the atone- 
ment for those favours which Christ has promised 
to bestow, relies with a blind credulity on an un- 
known God. But when these parts are united to- 
gether, this confusion disappears ; light beams upon 
the subject, and the harmony of all becomes visi- 
ble. We see God waiting to receive returning 
sinners, and actually lifting upon them the light of 
his reconciled countenance. These distinct opera- 
tions are plainly to be inferred from Mi% W.'s de- 
finition of justifying faith. Of these, the one is 
prospective, and the other retrospective; the latter 
always presupposes the former ; both are necessary 
to give it completion ; and Mr. W. generally fixes 
his definition where justifying faith acquires its con* 
summation. 

With these distinctions and this harmony before 
us, we shall find but little difficulty in reconciling 
the following letter of Mr. J. Wesley to his bro- 
ther, with his definition of justifying faith, which 
has been already given, I copy the letter, to pre- 
vent Mr. H. from charging me with a wish to sup- 
press it. It is dated in July, 1747. 

* DEAR BROTHER, 

u Yesterday I was thinking on a desideratum 



29 



among us, a Genesis Problematica on justifying 
faith. A skeleton of it, (which you may fill up, 
or any one that has leisure,) I have roughly set down. 

" Is justifying faith a sense of pardon ? Nega- 
tur. It is denied. 

" J . Every one is deeply concerned to under- 
stand this question well ; hut preachers most of 
all ; lest they either make them sad whom God 
hath not made sad; or encourage them to say 
peace, where there is no peace. 

" Some years ago, w r e heard nothing of justifying 
faith, or a sense of pardon ; so that when we did 
hear of them, the theme was quite new to us ; and 
we might easily, especially in the heat and hurry of 
controversy, lean too much, either to the one hand, 
or to the other. 

" 2. By justifying faith, I mean that faith which 
whosoever hath no t^ is under the wrath and the 
curse of God,. By a sense of pardon, I mean a 
distinct, explicit assurance, that my sins are for- 
given. 

" I allow, 1. That there is such an explicit assu- 
rance. £. That it is the common- "privilege of real 
christians. 3. That it is the proper christian faith 
which purifies the heart, and overcometh the world. 

" But I cannot allow, that justifying faith is 
such an assurance, or necessarily connected there- 
with. 

" 3» Because, if justifying faith necessarily implies 
such an explicit assurance of pardon, then every 



so 



one who has it not, is under the wrath and under 
the curse of God. But this is a supposition con- 
trary to Scripture,, as well as to experience. 

" Contrary to Scripture : to Isaiah, h 10. " Who 
is among you that feareth the Lord, that obeyeth 
the voice of his servant/that walketh in darkness, 
and hath no light ? Let him trust in the name of the 
Lord, and stay upon his God/' 

" Contrary to xicts, x. 34. " Of a truth I per- 
ceive that God is no respecter of persons ; but in 
every nation, he that feareth God, and woiketh 
righteousness, is accepted of him.'* 

* Contrary to experience : for L R. 8cc. &c. had 
peace with God, no doubt, no fear, before they had 
that sense of pardon : and so have I frequently had, 

* Again. The assertion, that justifying faith is 
a sense of pardon, is contrary to reason : it is flatly 
absurd. For how can a sense of our having received 
pardon, be the condition of our receiving it ? 

" 4. If you object, 1. " E T. St. Paul, &c. had 
this sense;" I grant they had ; but they were jus* 
tified before the}- had it. 2. " We know fif- 
teen hundred persons who have this assurance/' 
Perhaps so : but this docs not prove they were not 
justified till they received it. 3. " We have been 
exceedingly blessed in preaching this doctrine." 
We have been blessed in preaching the great truths 
of the gospel ; although we tacked to them, in the 
simplicity of our hearts, a proposition which was 
not true, 4. " But does not our Church give this 



51 



account of justifying faith f ? I am sure she does 
of saving Christian faith. I think she does of jus- 
tifying faith too. But to the law, and to the testi- 
mony. All men may err ; " but the word of the 
Lord shall stand for ever." 

On this letter Mr. H. makes several general re- 
marks; among which are to be found the following : 
u I appeal to common sense, and common honesty, 
" whether the letter does not contain decisive proof 
" that Mr. W. did change his opinion on the points 
" in question ?" (p. 10.) This is the point which 
he next proceeds to prove ; and in order to accom- 
plish his intention, he goes on more minutely to 
examine the letter in its several paragraphs, and to 
animadvert upon them. These animadversions I 
shall endeavour to follow ; and, to prevent confu- 
sion, shall insert Mr. Wesley's words between 
double commas,, and Mr. Home's between single 
ones. 

" Is justifying faith a sense of pardon? It is de- 
nied." 1 I ask, if the definition states justifying 
6 faith to be, 3 A sure trust and confidence, that a 
f: man hath in God, through Christ, that his sins 

* are forgiven him," do not the assertors of the de« 
6 finition, point blank, contradict the writer of the 

* letter r' That these latter words, which Mr. H. 
has here quoted from Mr. W., do not contain his , 
full definition of justifying faith, I have already 
pointed out, previously to my insertion of Mr. W.'s 
letter; and nothing can be more unfair than t© 



32 



contrast the passage from the letter with a partial 
extract from the definition, on purpose to infer a 
contradiction. But granting the quotation to have 
been fairly made, and that it contained the whole 
that Mr. W. had advanced in his definition, I an- 
swer, that no contradiction can be made to appear, 
unless it can be proved that " a sense of pardon" is 
exactly synonymous with u a sure trust and confi- 
dence in God." " A sense of pardon" is that which, 
faith realizes — that which faith brings home, and 
therefore never can constitute that faith by which 
it is apprehended. Where then is the contradict 
tion that was so " point blank ¥' The reverse in- 
deed would have made one with a witness. 

u By justifying faith, I mean that faith, without 
which a man is under the wrath and curse of God. 
By a sense of pardon, I mean a distinct, explicit 
assurance that my sins are forgiven." 6 To this 
* doctrine I say, as the dying patriot, Paul Diodati 
4 to his country, Esto per pet ua / Live for ever !' To 
the language of both I most heartily say Amen. I 
must, nevertheless, be permitted to observe, that in 
this passage Mr. W. gives no definition of faith 
whatever; and, consequently, can never introduce it 
to oppose that which Mr. H. wishes to see demo- 
lished. His words on this occasion may more pro- 
perly be considered as forming a proposition which 
he makes to his brother, that might either be an- 
swered by him,, or any other person who had leisure, 
The answer, filling these outlines; was one part of 



sa 

-the desideratum which he sought. As to the 
" sense of pardon" which he here defines, it may 
be necessary to observe, that he is speaking of an 
assurance which he expressly sa3 r sis u explicit/ 
and " distinct" from justifying faith, particularly 
from, its prospective mode of operation ; — an assu- 
rance which, on account of this invariable charac- 
teristic, can never be identified with it. To whom 
this faith or assurance applies, Mr. W. informs us 
in the next paragraph. He designates it as " the 
common privilege of real christians," and affirms it 
to be " the proper christian faith." 

" I allow, 1. That there is such an assurance. 2. 
That it is the common privilege of real christians. 
3. That it is the proper christian faith." 6 The two 

* first propositions I admit; the third I decline; 
' because, no assurance can be faith, any more than 

* the effect can be its own cause.' It ought not to 
pass without observation, that Mr. W. in this pas- 
sage entirely changes the terms which he now in- 
troduces to our notice. He no longer confines our 
views to justiiied believers, of whom there have been 
multitudes under the inferior and darker dispensa- 
tions of grace; but carries them to christians, 
" real christians," christians who are more matured 
in grace, and thoroughly furnished unto every good 
word and work. In like manner, he detaches this 
assurance of which he speaks, and which he had 
before defined to be " distinct and explicit/' from 
justifying faith, applies it to a more finished chp,- 

c 5 



m 

racter, and asserts it to be u the proper christian 
faith." How then, it may be asked, can Mr. H. 
or any other man produce this letter to contradict 
Mr. W.'s original definition of justifying faith, and 
from hence infer that he abandoned his primary 
principles ? 

But no " assurance," Mr. H. contends, c can be 
faith, any more than the effect can be its own 
cause/ This assertion entirely changes the ground 
on which the inquiry has hitherto stood, and gives 
to the question another aspect. It is now no 
longer a question about different degrees of assu- 
rance ; but whether, in the abstract, assurance con- 
stitutes any part whatever of faith, or is only an ef- 
fect which results from it. What then, I would 
ask, must be the nature of that faith which totally 
excludes every idea of assurance ? And what must 
be the nature of that assurance which has no con- 
nection with failb but as its cause ? For it must be 
remembered, that the question is not now about 
that degree of assurance which Mr. W. has defined 
to be " distinct and explicit," but about assurance 
in the abstract; for Mr. H. asserts that 1 no assu- 
rance can be faith.' A faith that totally excludes 
all assurance, must be a faith that is destitute of 
confidence (unless we may have an assurance where 
no confidence exists, which is a palpable contra- 
diction) ; and how any operation of the mind, 
from which confidence is entirely excluded, can be 
denominated faith, I feel myself at a loss to know. 



35 



But this subject #ffl be more minutely investigated 
in a future letter. 

" But I cannot allow that justifying faith is such 
an assurance, or necessarily connected with it." 
' Nor I, neither. A man may trust in Christ alone, 
r with a good and honest heart, for acceptance and 
* salvation, and found his prayers and hopes on this 
' trust. This is justifying faith.' By referring to 
Mr. W.'s letter it will evidently appear, that the as- 
surance of which he here speaks is that which he had 
previously defined, and denominated " distinct and 
explicit." This, according to Mr. Wesley, is * the 
proper christian faith;" and as such, it is " the com- 
mon privilege of real christians." But what does Mr. 
H. mean by trusting in Christ with a good and ho- 
liest heart, for acceptance and salvation ? Can our 
hearts be good prior to acceptance ? If so, what is 
become of justification ; If not, what k become of 
the assertion ? Is not this making the xrait good 
before the tree is made so !— Is not this a strange 
inversion of principle — -an inversion, which makes 
goodness, which is an effect of justification, to 
exist prior to justification, and to be in part the 
condition of our acceptance with God for the at- 
tainment of it. I am aware that with this " good 
and honest heart," Mr. H. insists ' we must trust 
in Christ alone/ But how our hearts are to be 
made good prior to this trust, he has not informed 
us. If the heart be good prior to this trust, then 
justificatiou cannot be by faith; and trusting iu 



36* 



Christ for acceptance is both chimerical and use- 
less : and if it be not good, the assertion vanishes 
into empty air. 

Still Mr. H. asserts, this trust in Christ alone, 
with this good and honest heart, may be exercised; 
and ' he may yet not have assurance, and much 
r less a full assurance ; because he is not taught to 

* consider his trust in Christ as justifying faith/ 
(p. 11.) Can then, I would ask, a man trust in 
Christ without having any assurance ? If so, what 
are we to understand by all the alluring invitations 
made to penitents r — What are all the promises of 
the gospel ? — Why are all the examples held out 
to us in the 1 1 th chapter of the Hebrews ?— And 
what are all the declarations of both Testaments.. ? 
When God declares that whosoever cometh to him 
he will in no wise cast out, is it not a promise on his 
part, designed to beget an assurance in the mind of 
every seeking soul, that he shall be accepted when 
he ventures on Christ ? When St. Paul exhorts 
the Hebrews (x. £2.) to draw near with a tine 
heart in full assurance of faith, does he mean any 
thing more than faith in a superlative degree f And 
do not his words plainly import, that assurance 
may exist without being, what he denominates, 

* full." If assurance admitted not of degrees, w hy 
should the Apostle denominate this a " full assu- 
rance j? The substantive itself would have been 
sufficient, and no adjective would have been neces- 
sary to designate its quality, because no room 
would have remained for any discrimination, .So 



3y 

far therefore does the assertion of Mr. H. appear 
from being true — that 1 no assurano^ can be faith,' 
that, on the contrary, wherever there is trust tiiore 
must be confidence ; and where there is confidence 
there must be assurance, though it be in a partial 
degree. And while these links remain unbroken, 
assurance, when taken in the abstract, must neces- 
sarily enter into all our ideas of faith, and in part 
constitute its essence and nature. 

If all assurance be the effect of faith, as Mr. H. 
asserts, what, I would ask, is the foundation of that 
faith which justifies ? Should it be replied, 66 The 
promises of the gospel grounded on the blood of 
the covenant/' — -1 ask again— can these influence*- 
my mind so as to induce it to give credit to their 
authenticity and importance, while they bring with 
them no assurance of their veracity ? And is not 
this assurance communicated to the mind, — and is 
not this one of the primary inducements of the soul 
to venture on the promises ? Is assurance ever rec- 
koned among the fruits or effects of faith, as dis- 
tinct from its nature ? Are we not taught to love 
God, because he first loved us? And can this effect be 
produced in our souls, while we have no assurance 
of his love to us ? Surely this is impossible. Assu- 
rance might therefore, in some or other of its 
modes, with more propriety be considered as the 
foundation than the effect of faith ; always remem 
bering that the infinite merit of Ctuist is the sole 
meritorious cause of every blessing. The trath 



38 

seems to be, that assurance in some or other of 
its branrh©^ y one of the radical ideas of faith. 
It reaches to its origin; accompanies it in its pro- 
gressive operations; pervades its nature; but shines 
with the utmost splendour in its fullest consumma- 
tion. But I return to Mr. Wesley's letter. 

" Besides, if justifying faith necessarily implied 
such an assurance, then every one who has it not, 
and so long as he hath it not, is under the wrath 
and curse of God." 6 Most assuredly. Make 
4 good the definition, and the damnatory clause 

* will defy all the batteries of reason and re vela- 

* tion/ Few among us, I presume, ever imagin- 
ed that justifying faith " necessarily implied such 
an assurance" as is full and luminous. Neverthe- 
less, in this very passage on which Mr. H. lays 
such a particular emphasis, he does not exclude 
assurance from entering into the nature of justify- 
ing faith. On the contrary, his observations are 
most expressly restricted to the superlative degree 
of it. 

" But this supposition is contrary to scripture, 
as well as experience. Contrary to scripture: to 
Isaiah, 1. 10. 6 Who is among you that feareth the 
Lord, that obeyeth the voice of his servant, that 
walketh in darkness, and hath no light? Let him 
trust in the name of the Lord, and stay upon his 
God/ Contrary to Acts, x. 34. 6 Of a truth I 
perceive that God is no respecter of persons; but, 
in every nation, he that feareth and w ojteth 



39 



righteousness is accepted with him." * When 

* you have attempted an answer to the scrip- 
i turco produced hy Mr. Wesley, I will throw in 
' your way a hundred more. As the assertors of 

* this damning definition, it is incumbent on you 
6 to prove that prophets and aposties damned any 

* who were following on to know the Lord/ Be- 
fore Mr. H. had drawn hir hasty conclusion, he 
should have ascertained what " that supposition" 
was, which is said to be contrary to scripture and 
experience? This he might easily have known by 
referring to the preceding paragraphs. There he 
would have seen, that it was the same as the foil 
assurance spoken of by St. Paul, and what was 
called " such an assurance" as Mr. W. had pre- 
viously excluded from being " necessarily" implied 
in justifying faith. What then is the answer to 
these scriptures, which we are called upon to at- 
tempt? I see none. I heartily receive them in 
their most " literal import." Had we, indeed, 
contended for justifying faith as necessarily includ- 
ing that plenary assurance which Mr. W. here 
discards, as not necessarily attached to justifying 
faith, and Mr. H. reprobates, I do not conceive 
that the scriptures adduced would have been re 
concileable with it. But in the present case, a 
removal of the foundation demolishes the super-* 
structure. 

" Contrary to experience; for I. R. &c. had 
peace with God, no fear, no doubt, before they 



40 



bad the sense of pardon. And so have I frequently 
had." f 1 add, so had Mr. C. Wesley, so have I, 
6 and thousands more/ To view this passage in 
its proper light, we have only to inquire — What 
does Mr. W. mean by " the sense of pardon ?' 
This he has already explained in his definition of 
the term: and here the shadow disappears; and 
justifying faith is acknowledged by Mr. W. to 
exist without " necessarily" implying that lumi- 
nous assurance spoken of above. If Mr. H. con- 
ceives that I am disposed to argue against this 
doctrine, it will only add to the number of his 
mistakes. 

" Again. The assertion, that justifying faith is .a 
sense of pardon, is contrary to reason; it is flatly 
absurd. For how can a sense of our having receiv- 
ed pardon, be the condition of our receiving it:" 
' If Mr. W. modestly doubted, whether he could 
' split a hair, may I not ask, Can you divide this 
i camel, or rather remove this mountain Can 
Mr. H. seriously suppose, that we ever imagined 
that justifying faith was a sense of pardon?, Can 
he prove that we ever asserted it in the manner in 
which Mr, W. notices it above ? I have already 
observed, that " a sure trust and confidence" 
in any given thing, or for any given thing, can 
never be the thing itself; in which, or for which, 
we trust. It is possible that " a sense of pardon'* 
may be a stimulus to faith — an object of faith — 
or the reward of faith; but in no sense whatever, 



41 



can it be faith itself, nor can the ideas for whicli 
these terms stand, be rendered synonymous with 
one another. In addition to this, the definitions 
which Mr. W. has given both of " a sense of par- 
don," and of " justifying faith," are such as forbid 
us to believe, that he ever entertained a sentiment 
which he so justly condemns as big with absurdity, 
" If you object, I. T. St. Paul, &c. had this 
sense, I grant they had; but they were justified 
before they had it. We know 1500 persons who 
have this assurance. Perhaps so; but this does 
not prove they were not justified before they had 
it." i It is impossible, in the nature of things, it 

* should be otherwise,' It was an easier task fox 
Mr. H . to drop this assertion, than to prove it true* 
Impossibilities, when they apply to God, are things 
which we ought to touch only with caution. Mr- 
Wesley, in the language which we have lately 
surveyed, has used much circumspection. He tells 
us, that justifying faith is not such " a sense of 
pardon", neither does justifying faith " necessarily 
imply such an assurance." It is easily discoverable, 
where most discretion is to be found, and prudence 
will direct us which side of the question to. take. 

" We have been exceedingly blessed in preach- 
ing this doctrine. W e have been blessed in preach- 
ing the great truths of the gospel, although w^e 
tacked to them, in the simplicity of our hearts, a 
proposition which was not true." i Flow manly 

* and ingenuous is this acknowledgment! You 



42 

* who fight for the definition, will impute the 
c success of your doctrine to its very errors/ 
What this proposition was, Mr. W. has not in- 
formed us. That it could not be his definition of 
justifying faith, is evident from his subsequent 
writings, in which it has been retained; and parti- 
cularly in a letter which Mr. H. has copied, page 
64, Written expressly on purpose to support it, in 
the year 1768, and addressed to Mr. James Mor- 
gan. And v/hat Mr. H. calls the ' damnatory 

* clause/ he had no occasion to relinquish; for it 
does not appear that he ever connected it with 
justifying, but with the full christian faith. 

On the concluding passages of Mr. W/s letter, 
I have no occasion to make any remarks. From 
church and articles, he appeals to the law and to 
the testimony, as the only infallible rule of faith 
and practice, and by this unerring standard all our 
debates must be decided. 

" Here," Mr. H. observes, u I close the evi- 

* dence of the letter; and it evinces what I pro- 
^ duced it to prove— that Mr. Wesley did renounce 

the definition as applying to justifying faith, as 
0 well as the damnatory clause. " (p. 24.) Mr, 
Wesley's definition of justifying faith, 1 have al- 
ready given in a preceding page; and the letter in 
which he is presumed to have renounced it, toge- 
ther with our remarks upon it, are now before the 
world. This is the tribunal before which he has. 
cited me to appear, and without solicitude I waiv 
the public decision* 



43 



That Mr. W. has, in any clause of the letter 
which I have examined, renounced his definition 
of justifying faith, is a position which I have yet 
to learn. " A belief that God both hath and will 
forgive our sins," Mr. W. has expressly included 
in his definition. This directs us to distinguish 
between the direct and reflex act of faith, — a dis- 
tinction which the tenacity of Mr. II .'s memory 
enables him to recollect, which, he says, I com- 
mended with much warmth some twenty years 
ago. (p. £0.) In this article, I hope he will 
give me credit for the stability of my principles* 
With this distinction before us, " puritanical" as 
it may be, I dare affirm, that there is not a passage 
in the letter which I have examined, that may not 
be fairly reconciled with the definition which Mr, 
H. says he has proved that Mr. W, did renounce, 
No man can tacitly and designedly relinquish a 
leading sentiment which he had previously cherish- 
ed and supported, and yet be unconscious of the 
change that has passed in his mind. If, therefore* 
the conduct of our venerable Founder has been 
such as Mr. II. has intimated, and, in his animad- 
versions on this letter, endeavours to support, his 
subsequent writings will not only prove his incon* 
sistency; but so far impeach the integrity of his 
moral character, as to entitle him to an appella- 
tion which Mr. H. would hesitate to bestow. For 
certain it is, that he who continues to propagate 
doctrines which he had renounced, sentiments 



44 



which he had abandoned,, and definitions which 
he had acknowledged to be fallacious, without 
being reconvinced of their propriety, (which must 
be precisely the case with Mr. W., if the statement 
of Mr. H. be correct) is unworthy the name of an 
honest man. T 

To prevent a close examination of Mr. W/s 
letter (or Genesis Problematica), and Mr. H.'s re- 
marks upon it, from being broken, I have hitherto 
passed over in silence many of Mr. H.'s detached 
observations. To some of these I shall now re- 
turn, before I close this letter. 

In p. 16. Mr. H. brings against us- the follow- 
ing accusation, 6 You lay another foundation 
' (than Christ), even assurance, and preach salva- 
* tion by assurance, justification by assurance 
i alone.' To accuse Mr. H. of not understand- 
ing our principles, would be very rude; and to 
charge him with wilfully misrepresenting them^ 
would still be worse. However, nothing but cha* 
rity can induce me to impute this passage to a 
mistake. But how does he make it appear that 
we lay another foundation ; and that we lay it in 
assurance \ Thus far he has adduced no evidence, 
though he has assumed the fact. And from this 
naked assumption, not more unfounded in truth 
than unsupported by reason, he argues as confi- 
dently as though the fabric rested on axioms 
which were incontrovertible. 

Mj,. H ? , however, ought to have known,, that/ 



45 



Oiixist alone is the foundation which we lay. It U 
to him alone that we commend sinners for accept- 
ance; from him alone that we expect pardon; 
through him alone that we hope for remission of 
sins; and that even the assurance, of which Mr. 
H. speaks with so much contempt, is only sought 
,as an evidence of the divine favour. It is by evi- 
dence alone, w r e contend, that we are enabled to 
know that our darkness is turned into light, our 
mourning into joy; and this must bring with it 
some degrees of assurance, before penitents can be 
persuaded to rejoice in the God of their salvation. 
Those characters " who bathe the feet of Jesus 
with tears of godly sorrow," (p. 13.) give unequi- 
vocal proofs of their distress-; and those who " are 
u actually praying for pardon in his name, who 
* are renounced by that evil world which they 
" have renounced," as expressly declare their want 
of forgiveness. These we comfort by bringing 
them to Jesus; by unfolding the promises to their 
broken and contrite hearts, and by pointing them 
to the Lamb of God, who taketh away the sin of 
the world; in whose precious blood, and dying 
love, their w^ounded spirits may find the balm of 
consolation. It is this that will o-ive them the oil 
of joy for mourning, and the garments of praise 
for the spirit of heaviness: and nothing but this, 
can rationally persuade them that the divine dis- 
pleasure is removed. An act of pardon must, 
without all doubt, in the order of things be issued 



46 



before it can be received, just as the substance 
which casts a shadow must move before the sha- 
dow which is dependent on it. But in the order of 
time, we know of no assignable priority, without 
descending to metaphysical distinctions, which in 
this case must rather injure divinity than improve 
it. 

Can a hope of pardon, I would ask, be identi- 
fied with forgiveness ? Can expectation be led to 
realize the fact which it pursues, without losing 
both its name and nature ? Can a man hope for a 
mental blessing which he possesses? Can a per- 
ception enter the mind, or take up its abode, where 
nothing is to be found but the evidence of its ab- 
sence? Impossible! And yet, absurd as it may 
appear, such must be the condition of every one 
who is persuaded that he is in the divine favour, 
while labouring under a sense of God's displeasure, 
even admitting that the cause of his sorrow is un- 
founded in fact. A criminal who hopes for pardon 
cannot be persuaded that he has obtained it, till 
he reallv has some other evidence besides that of 
mere existence to induce him to believe the fact. 
And those who would instruct him to suspend his 
fears, while in this condition, would only lead him 
to substitute his expectation in the room of the 
reprieve* Job would have considered such men in 
the light of " miserable comforters." Can any 
man suppose, that the criminal, under circum- 
stances which 1 have mentioned, because he refused 



all, consolation till he obtained some assurance 
of the reprieve for which he waited, would substi- 
tute his own assurance in the stead either of the 
reprieve itself, the monarch by whom it, was issued, 
or the mediator by whom it was procured? Surely 
there can be no difficulty in answering so plain a 
question. And yet Mr. H., from some unaccount- 
able principle of reasoning, when we transfer the 
analogy, infers, under circumstances precisely si- 
milar, that we " do virtually by our doctrine re- 
u nounce Christ crucified, salvation by faith, and 

justification by faith," (p. 16.) and lay another 
foundation in assurance. 

The doctrine of justification by faith Mr. H. 
does not hesitate to admit; but by what marks 
the fact is to be ascertained, he has nearly left us 
to conjecture, having imparted little information 
on the subject. Proper internal evidence he can- 
not allow, for this would lead him to adopt that 
very assurance which he so pointedly condemns. 
In the outward actions lies his principal resource. 
This, however, he finds defective, and therefore 
mixes up a catholicon of penitence and reforma- 
tion, and infers genuine faith from this unscrip- 
tural combination. And yet, strange as it may 
appear, in p. 16. he charges us with " inverting 
" the whole order of scripture and experience," be- 
cause we ascertain justifying faith from the love of 
God shed abroad in the heart ! " You substitute," 
he observes, a the superstructure for the found a** 



48 



u lion; and a man is left to infer his faith from 
* the love of God shed abroad in his heart." (p. 16.) 
I will not now retort the expression, but content 
myself with asking, — Who could have thought 
this to be the language of a man, who but two 
pages before haxl made penitence and reformation 
a sufficient evidence from which justifying faith 
was to be inferred? That some evidence must 
exist, we in common admit; and the primary 
question now is — In what does it consist ? Differ- 
ent degrees may undoubtedly take place in differ- 
ent persons; but some internal evidence there 
must be. Without this, the inward condition of 
him who has faith, and of him who has it not, 
must be precisely the same. And if outward con- 
duct can alone determine, then no criterion can 
remain, whereby mere morality can be distin- 
guished from evangelical piety. External refor- 
mation is to be found with both. 

But, how much soever the internal evidences of 
justifying faith may be discarded— for faith itself 
Mr. H. appears a strenuous advocate. Hence, he 
observes, (p. £S.) that " neither assurance, nor the 
" spirit of adoption, constitutes us children of 
il God, but faith in Christ." That sinners are 
justified and saved by grace, through faith as an 
instrument, I admit; but cannot allow that " faith 
" constitutes them children of God." Were this 
to be granted, divine mercy would be totally ex- 
cluded, and Christ reduced to a mere passive oh- 



49 



ject, would liave little to do in the affair. What 
this faith is, for which Mr. H. contends, the fol- 
lowing passage will most amply explain : " He 
" pardoneth and absolveth all them that truly re- 
" pent, and unfeignedly believe his- holy gospel. 
" Here our church most confidently absolves true 
" penitents who believe the gospel; and, by the 
" grace of God, I will hold fast her sound doc- 
" trine." (p, 24.) Souls thus truly penitent, are 
most undoubtedly those whom God will justify. 
But, can Mr. H. seriously believe, that a mere 
assent to the theory of the gospel is all that is 
meant by believing it, in order to absolution, or 
justification, in the sight of God? It may, per- 
haps, be replied, a that a cold assent, which is with- 
out penitence, is excluded." But if this consti- 
tutes the only difference, then, abstractedly consi- 
dered, the faith of the penitent and of the impenitent 
is the same. Penitence alone makes the distinc- 
tion ; and as that which alone makes the difference 
is entitled to pre-eminence, we are rathcr ; according 
to this theory, justified by penitence than faith. 

But, even granting that faith in Christ " consti- 
u lutes' us children of God, How is the certainty and 
nature of this faith to be ascertained ? Not by any 
internal evidence; for this would lead either to an 
assurance, which is exploded ; or to a direct witness, 
which is equally discarded by Mr. H.: — Not by 
reformation; for this would give to the christian and 



50 



the moralist an equal claim : — Not by repentance; 
for this precedes faith. (Mark, i. 15. Acts, ii. 38.) 
Not by reformation and repentance blended together; 
" for this would be to invert the ay hole order of scrip- 
ture and experience." Thus all inward and outward 
discriminating' evidence is totally excluded. And 
few, perhaps, would charge me with inconclusive 
reasoning, were I to assert, that he who is justified 
by that which excludes all discriminating evidence 
is not justified by faith, but by credulity. 

In arguing against a a sure trust and confidence 
in God," as forming any part of justifying faith, 
and against the " direct witness of the Spirit/' 
Mr. H. adverts to the faith of Simon Magus, and 
that which Philip preached to the Eunuch. And 
from the manner in which the subject is introduced, 
it is evidently designed to confirm the opinion that 
was advanced in the last quotation ; namely, that 
penitents are absolved who believe the gospel. In 
reply to the Eunuch who requested to be baptized, 
" Philip said, if thou believest with all thine heart, 
" thou mayest; and he answered, I believe that Jesus 
" Christ is the Son of God. This is the grand ele- 
" mental primary truth of Christianity ; the living 
u rock and foundation of the church, against 
" which, our Lord assures us, the gates of hell 
" shall never prevail. It involves in it, or necessa- 
" rily draws after it, the belief, experience, and 
*' practice, of every gospel truth." (p. 15.) It is 



51 



only on the last sentence that I am disposed to 
make any remarks ; and admitting the assertion 
which this contains to be founded in fact, I know 
not how any can be excluded .from the kingdom of 
heaven, but such as doubt the incarnation and 
divinity of the Son of God, But are none to be 
found who hold these truths in unrighteousness ? 
Are there none who believe these truths, without 
having their faith adulterated, either with " assur- 
a ance," or " the direct witness of the Spirit ?" 
Are none living without hope and without God in 
the world, who admit this important " elemental 
u truth ?" Look at the vices which prevail ; hearken 
to the oaths and blasphemies which are uttered ; 
and survey the multitudes who are drinking down 
iniquity, and wallowing in all manner of nlthiness, 
and let fact decide upon the bold assertion. Every 
clay, and almost every house, present us with evi- 
dence. And yet Mr. H., in the face of ten thou- 
sand witnesses, declares, without any qualification 
whatsoever, that " this grand, elemental, primary 
" truth of Christianity, involves in it, or necessarily 
" draws after it, the belief, experience, and prac- 
a tice, of every gospel truth." 

" That sinners are justified the moment they fly 
" to Christ," is a sentiment which Mr. H., in com- 
mon with ourselves, adopts as an article of his 
creed. " But who," he asks, " can ascertain that 
" blessed moment ?* He answers-—* " Not them- 



52 



" selves, nor any human being." (p. 25.) St. Paul 

has said, that " being justified by faith, we have 
peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ; 
by whom also we have access by faith into this 
grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of 
the glory of God." (Rom. v. 1, 2.) He afterwards 
adds, " There is, therefore, now no condemna- 
tion to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk 
not after the flesh but after the Spirit. For the 
law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus, hath made 
me free from the law of sin and death." (Rom. viii. 
1, 2,) Here are two evidences adduced by the 
Apostle, in direct opposition to what Mr. H. asserts. 
The one is a freedom from condemnation; the 
other is peace with God, as an immediate and in- 
ternal effect of faith. To make a separation be- 
tween them is impossible. They both partake of 
one common nature, and mutually confirm and 
•corroborate each other. If condemnation can be 
felt, a removal of it cannot but make a similar 
impression. For even admitting that it left the 
mind in a state of vacancy, this vacancy, or ab- 
sence of a disagreeable impression, must afford a 
decisive evidence by being compared with its re^ 
verse. But, in this condition the mind of a be- 
liever is not suffered to remain. The Father of 
mercies affords it a more unquestionable evidence 
than that which arises from the mere absence of 
pain and trouble, by imparting that peace which 



53 

results from faith. Can mental peace succeed to 
mental trouble, and leave its possessors insensible 
of the changer Are not peace and trouble inward 
sensations: Can either exist, and make no im- 
pressions ? Or, can any thing be said to be either 
an impression, or a sensation, while it is unfelt i 
Whatever is a sensation must be felt; and what m 
felt, brings with it a knowledge of its existence j 
and if so, the time of its arrival may certainly be 
ascertained. 

I shall here add, out of the sermons of Dr. 
Paley, a quotation which is so excellent, so clear, 
and so illustrative of the present subject, that my 
readers will, I am sure, excuse me for laving it 
before them. On this important point, that great 
man speaks as follows : 

" At this day we have not Jews and Gentiles to 
preach to; but persons really in as unconverted a 
state, as any Jew or Gentile could be in our Sa* 
viour's time. They are no more christians, as to 
any actual benefit of Christianity to their souls, than 
the most hardened Jew, or the most profligate 
Gentile, was in the age of the gospel. As to any 
difference in the two cases, the difference is all 
against them. These must be converted, before 
they can be saved. The course of their thoughts 
must be changed, the very principle upon which 
they act must be changed. Considerations which 
never, or which hardly ever, entered into their 



54 



minds, must deeply and perpetually engage thein. 
— Views and motives, which did not influence 
them at all, either as checks from doing evil, or 
as inducements to do good, must become the 
views and motives which they regularly consult* 
and by which they are guided ; that is to say, 
there must be a revolution of principle; the visible 
conduct will follow the change ; but there must be 
a revolution within. 

u A change so entire, so deep, so important as 
this, I do allow to be a conversion ; and no one, 
who is in the situation above described, can be 
saved without undergoing it; and he must, ne- 
cessarily, both be sensible of it at the time, and 
remember it all his life afterwards. It is too mo- 
mentous an event ever to be forgotten. A man 
might as easily forget his escape from a shipwreck. 
Whether it was sudden, or whether it was gradual, 
if it was effected, (and the fruits will prove that,) 
it was a true conversion : and every such person 
may justly, both believe and say to himself, that 
he was converted at a particular assignable time. 
It may not be necessary to speak of his conversion ; 
but he will always think of it with unbounded 
thankfulness to the Giver of all grace, the Author 
mf all mercies, spiritual as well as temporal." 

(Paley's Sermons, p. 12Q. Lond. Edit. 1808.) 



55 



To language so expressive, it would be as difE- 
cult, as it is needless, to make any additions. " It 
is the language / says Dr. Buchanan) of the true 
•church of Christ in all ages and nations yet, 
. unfortunately, it is in direct opposition to the sen- 
timents of Mr. H., who asserts, that u no humaa 
u being can ascertain that blessed moment." 

I beg leave to subscribe myself, 

Dear and respected Friends, 

Your truly affectionate Brother, 



T COKE 



LETTER II. 



BELOVED BRETHREN, 

Closely connected with the detached 
paragraphs of the preceding epistle, is the great 
doctrine of justification by faith in the Son of 
God. The sentiments of Mr. Wesley, on this 
momentous subject, and of those who have acted 
in connection with, and who now succeed him in 
his ministerial labours, Mr. Home has designedly 
made the subject of his investigation. This has 
led him to conclusions, which are foreign to our 
own ; and to an asperity of expression which we 
cannot approve, and will not retaliate. But, it is 
not to this inestimable blessing alone that he has 
confined his inquiry ; the nature of that faith, 
through which it is received, has also engaged his 
attention ; but, above all, the precise condition of 
the soul, when in the course of its spiritual pro- 
gress it is united to Christ, is the primary object 
of his consideration. This latter, without doubt, 

D 5 



58 



Is a topic of serious importance; but, justification 
itself, and the nature and characteristics of that 
faith by which it is both obtained and realized, are 
points which demand, or appear to demand, a 
prior determination. To these subjects, and those 
views of them which have been presented to the 
world, both by Mr. W. and ourselves, permit me 
to call your attention in this letter : The veil of 
obscurity, which opposition has drawn over them, 
renders an attempt of this kind highly necessary. 
This veil I hope to remove, by endeavouring to 
trace a consistency in our doctrines, and an asree- 
ment between the sentiments of Mr. W\ and oar 
own, notwithstanding Mr. H. has exerted himself 
to persuade us, that this consistency and agree* 
ment have no existence. 

To prevent our thoughts from being perplexed, 
while prosecuting this arduous task, I will jhst 
inquire— What is Justification? 

According to the eleventh article of the Church 
of England, " We are accounted righteous before 
God, only for the merit of our Lord and Saviour 
Jesus Christ, by faith, and not for our own works 
or deservings. Wherefore, that we are justified 
by faith only, is a most wholesome doctrine, and 
very full of comfort, as more largely is set forth in 
the Homily of Justification." In this Homily on 
justification, the same doctrine is presented to us 
in the following words : " In our justification is 
not only God's mercy and grace, but also his ju&« 



59 



tice, which the Apostle calls the justice of God j 
and it consisteth in paying our ransom, and ful- 
filling of the law; and so the grace of God cloth 
not shut out the justice of God in our justification; 
but only shutteth out the justice (or righteousness) 
of man ; that is to say, the justice of our works, 
as to be merits of deserving our justification. And, 
therefore, St. Paul declareth nothing upon the 
behalf of man, concerning his justification, but 
only a true and lively faith, which, nevertheless, is 
the gift of God, §nd not man's only work without 
God. And yet that faith doth not shut out repen- 
tance, hope, love, dread, and the fear of God, to 
be joined with faith in every man that is justified, 
but it shutteth them out from the office of justify- 
ing/' Our first Reformers were so solicitous to 
establish this grand point — that the justification of 
sinners, as such, was through the merits of Jesus 
Christ alone, that they further add, u nevertheless, 
this sentence, that we are justified by faith only 
is not so meant, that the said justifying faith is 
alone in man, without true repentance, hope, 
charity, dread, and the fear of God, at any time 
or season. But this saying is spoken to take away 
clearly all merit of our works, as being unable to 
deserve justification at God's hand — Christ himself 
only being the cause meritorious thereof." 

That the doctrines contained in the preceding 
quotations are perfectly congenial with those which 



60 



Mr. Wesley uniformly taught on the same impor- 
tant subject, his own words will most decidedly 
prove. In his sermon on Justification by Faith, he 
delivers, without disguise, his full view of the 
general ground on which the whole doctrine of 
justification rests, and then proceeds to declare, 
what, in his opinion, justification is. When speak- 
ing on the former of these points, he describes 
man as being created in the moral image of God, 
— as being placed under a law which required 
perfect obedience, — as being in a state of per- 
fect freedom,— as violating the precepts of that la\r 
under which he was placed, — as bringing " death 
into the world, and all our w r oe," by that trans* 
gression — and as exposing himself, and all his 
posterity, to feel the bitter pains of eternal misery. 

" In this state (he observes) w r ere all mankind, 
when God so loved the world, that he gave his 
only-begotten Son, to the end we might not perish, 
but have everlasting life. In the fulness of time, 
he was made man, another common head of man- 
kind, a second general parent and representative 
of the human race. And as such it wa- that he 
bore our griefs ; the Lord laying oil him the iniqui- 
ties of us all, Then was he wounded for our 
transgressions, and bruised for our miouities. He 
made his soul an offering for sin. He poured out 
his blood for the transgressors: he bare our sins 
hi his own body on the tree, that by his stripes we 
might be healed: and, by that one oblation of 



61 



himself once offered, he hath redeemed me, and 
all mankind ; having thereby made a full, perfect, 
and sufficient sacrifice, and satisfaction, for the sins 
of the whole world. 

" In consideration of this, that the Son of God 
hath tasted death for every man, God hath now 
reconciled the world unto himself, not imputing to 
them their former trespasses. And thus, as by 
the offence of one, judgment came upon all men to 
condemnation; even so, by the righteousness of 
one, the free gift came upon all men unto justifi- 
cation. So that, for the sake of his well-beloved 
Son, of what he hath done and suffered for us, 
God nov/ vouchsafes on one only condition (which 
himself also enables us to perform) both to remit 
the punishment due to our sins, to reinstate us in 
his favour, and to restore our dead souls to spiri- 
tual life, as the earnest of life eternal. 

" This, therefore, is the general ground of the 
whole doctrine of justification. By the sin of the 
first Adam, who was not only the father, but 
likewise the representative of us all, we all fell 
short of the favour of God: we all became chil- 
dren of wrath : or, as the Apostle expresses it, 
judgment came upon all men to condemnation. 
Even so, by the sacrifice for sin, made by the se- 
cond Adam, as the representative of us all, God 
is so far reconciled to all the world, that he hath 
given them a new covenant. The plain condition 



62 



whereof being once fulfilled, there is no more con- 
demnation for us ; but we are justified freely by 
his grace, through the redemption that is in Jesus 
Christ. 

" But what is it to be justified? What is jus- 
tification? The plain notion of justification is 
pardon, the forgiveness of sins. It is tha>t act of 
God the Father, whereby, for the sake of the pro- 
pitiation made by the blood of his Son, he shew- 
eth forth his righteousness (or mercy) by the re- 
mission of the sins that are past. This is the easy, 
natural account of it given by St. Paul through- 
out this whole epistle to the Komans. So he ex- 
plains it himself, more particularly in this fourth, 
and in the following chapter. Thus, in the next 
verses but one to the text, Blessed are they, saith 
he, whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins 
are covered ; blessed is the man to whom the 
Lord will not impute sin. To him that is justified 
or forgiven, Gocl will not impute sin to his con- 
demnation. He will not condemn him on that 
account, either in this world or that which is to 
come. His sins, all his past sins, in thought, 
word, and deed, are covered, are blotted out ; 
shall not be remembered or mentioned against him 
any more than if they had not been. God will not 
inflict on that sinner what he deserved to suffer, 
because the Son of his love hath suifered for him. 
And from the time we are accepted through the 



63 



Beloved, reconciled to God through his blood, he 
loves, and blesses, and watches over us for good^ 
even as if we had never sinned. 

" Indeed, the Apostle in one place seems to 
extend the meaning of the word much farther ; 
where he says, not the hearers of the law, but the 
doers of the law, shall be justified. Here he ap- 
pears to refer our justification to the sentence of 
the great day. And so our Lord himself unques- 
tionably doth, when he says, by thy words thou 
shalt be justified : proving thereby, that for every 
idle word men shall speak, they shall give an ac- 
count in the day of judgment. But, perhaps, we 
can hardly produce another instance of St. Paul's 
using the word in that distant sense. In the gene* 
ral tenor of his writings, it is evident he doth not: 
And least of all in the text before us, which un- 
ci* iably speaks, not of those who have already 
finished their course, but of those who are just 
now setting out, just beginning to run th? race 
which is set before them." 

(Wesley's Sermons, vol. i. p. 88— 

That there is between the sentiments of Mi% 
Wesley, and the articles and homilies of the church 
of England, on this point, a pleasing and sti iking 
coincidence, the extracts which have been taken 
from each will fully establish. The same leading 
features of the doctrine of justification before God 
are visible in all ; and, so far as human authority 
can give weight to truth that has been obscured by 



64 

motley opinions, the light in which Mr. W. has 
placed this important doctrine laj T s claim to that 
of the highest respectability. But this authority 
would have served no other purpose than to shew 
the extent of error, if the sacred writings had re* 
fused to countenance what he has advanced. Hap- 
pily they are in perfect unison with his views of 
the subject; and it was evidently with an eye to 
the sanction that they afforded, and not to any 
human authority, that he formed his creed, and 
avowed his belief before mankind. In the para* 
graphs which have been quoted from his writings, 
he has chiefly confined himself to the language of 
scripture. It is from this, rather than from his 
own words, that he has directed us to gather the 
doctrine which he has placed before us. To the 
scriptures which Mr. W. has produced in favour of 
this doctrine which he inculcated, it will be need- 
less to make any additions, till it has been proved 
that tfee?e are misapplied. To do this, no attempt 
has been recently made ; and it is totally unne- 
cessary to vindicate what has either been already 
defended, or net yet called in question. 

It is, nevertheless, incumbent on me to state, 
that the" doctrines advanced by Mr. W. in the pre- 
ceding paragraphs, are those which his followers 
have embraced, both as to the nature of justifica- 
tion, and the general ground on which that doc- 
trine rests. From these we have not departed. 
We view them as founded on the oracles of God ; 



65 



as truths which are connected with the analogy of 
faith, and as fundamentals in religion which it 
would be criminal to violate. But, with innova- 
tion, or dereliction on these points, Mr. Home has 
not charged either Mr. W* or ourselves. They 
may, therefore, be dismissed without further ob- 
servation, to make way for other subjects, with 
which these doctrines are intimately connected, 
but which are more immediately the occasion of 
these letters. 

Secondly, I proceed to inquire, What, under 
the gospel dispensation, is necessary on the part 
of man in order to justification ? 

As man is wholly corrupted, he cannot possibly 
renovate himself; the supposition would involve a 
palpable contradiction : and, therefore, every ra- 
dical change that takes place within him must 
necessarily originate in another. The operative 
agency through which this inward change is 
wrought, has uniformly been ascribed by us to the 
Holy Spirit; for, it is lie alone that is appointed 
by the Father to convince the world of sin, of 
righteousness, and of judgment. (John, xvi. 8.) 

Agreeably to the doctrines which w T e both pub- 
lish and defend, we believe that the Holy Spirit 
first awakens man, who is dead in trespasses and 
sins, and gives him to see his spiritual condition ; 
presents before him his universal depravity ; his 
moral relation to God ; and his interests in another 



66 



world. The sensibility which is thus begotten, 

cannot but create uneasiness in the soul ; and this 
uneasiness is heightened in pioportion to the im- 
pression that is made. If the man look into eter- 
nity, the prospect is truly melancholy. Hell seems 
moved from beneath to meet him at his coming, 
and to present him with the punishment that is due 
to his transgressions. If he look towards heaven, 
the skies are as brass, and forbid his entrance : 
Cherubim and a flaming sword encircle the tree of 
life ; and he feels assured that God is angry witb 
the wicked every day continually. 

The dread of punishment which these uncom- 
fortable prospects afford, induces him to put on an 
external reformation. He ceases to do evil, and 
learns to do well; performs duties which, through 
life, he had neglected ; forsakes companions with 
whom he had been accustomed to associate ; ancj 
uses prayer to which he had been a perfect stranger. 
The arrows of the Almighty sticking fast in him, 
he bewails his condition with tears of unaffected 
sorrow ; sinks beneath the burden which weighs 
down his spirits ; and, perhaps, at times, like David, 
roars aloud for the disquietude of his soul. The 
gloomy apprehensions of his mind so far destroy 
his appetite for sin, that the wicked propensities 
of his heart no longer seek after full indulgence. 
The passions are arrested by a superior power ; 
aiicl the weakness which these manifest, negatively 



67 



favours the outward reformation which a prospect 
of danger, awakened by the Spirit of God, now 
renders visible to all. 

In this situation he seeks after deliverance with- 
out knowing distinctly how or where to find it ; 
but cries from the anguish of his heart, " God be 
merciful to me a sinner." He thus breaks off his 
sins by repentance ; groans beneath the load which 
presses him intolerably; and trembles, lest, in this 
condition, he should be called to stand before God 
to give an account for the deeds done in the body. 
With earnest prayer he uses self-denial, takes up 
his cross wherever he finds occasion ; examines the 
word of God ; associates with the godly ; solicit! 
their advice ; and urges his petitions with unceas* 
ing application. In addition to the discharge of 
these duties, he feeds the hungry, he clothes the 
naked, if his circumstances will allow him thus to 
act ; he w ipcs the tear from the face of the dis« 
tressed, and causes the widow's heart to dance for 
joy. " If it be objected," says Mr. Wesley, 
u that" these are good works — the answer is easy. 
He may do those even before he is justified. And 
these are, in one sense, good works ; they are good. 
and profitable to man. But it does not follow that 
they are, strictly speaking, good in themselves, or 
good in the sight of God. All truly good works 
(to use the language of our church) follow after 
justification. And they are, therefore, good and 
acceptable to God in Christ, because they spring 



68 

out of a true and living faith. By a parity 6f 
reason, all works done before justification are not 
good, in the christian sense, forasmuch as they 
spring not of faith -in Jesus Christ, (though, from 
some kind of faith in God they tnay spring); yea, 
rather, for that they are not done as God hath 
willed and commanded -them to be done, we doubt 
not (how strange soever it may appear to soine) 
but they have the nature of sift, 

u Perhaps, those who doubt of thk have not 
duly considered the weighty reason which is here 
assigned, why no works done before justification 
can be truly and properly good. The argument 
plainly runs thus : 

" No works are good which are not done as God 
hath willed and commanded them to be done : But 
no works done before justification are done as God 
hath willed and commanded them to be done : there- 
fore, no works done before justification are good. 

u The first proposition is self-evident. And the 
Second, That no works done before justification 
me done as God hath willed and commanded them 
to be done, will appear equally plain and undeni- 
able, if we only consider — God hath willed and 
commanded, that all our works should be done in 
charity — in love, in that love to God, which pro* 
duces love to ail mankind. But none of our works 
can be done in this love, while the love of the 
Father (of God as our Father) is not in us. And 
this love cannot be in us, till we receive the Spirit 



69 



of adoption, crying in our hearts, Abba, Father, 
if, therefore, God doth not justify the ungodly, 
and him that (in this sense) worketh not, then 
hath Christ died in vain; then, notwithstanding his 
death, can no flesh living be justified." 

(Wesley's Sermons, vol. i. p. 93.) 
Few truths can be more evident than those which 
Mr. Wesioy has thus stated. The awakened sinner 
may do ail, and more than all the works that I 
have enumerated in this letter, while his principles 
are entirely servile. Under their influence, he acts 
from fear without filial love ; and though he feels 
gratitude towards God, if it be worthy of such an 
exalled name, it does not so much arise from a sense 
of favours actually received, as from a recollection 
that Cod has thus far preserved him from per- 
dition. 

The man who labours under this distress, and 
is reduced to the extremity I have thus described, 
learns from the sacred oracles, and from the pious 
With whom he converses, that "This is a faithful 
saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ 
Jesus came into the world to save sinners/' To 
this important truth, the same Spirit which awaken- 
ed him bears its inward testimony, and helps to 
direct, him to " Behold the Lamb of God that 
taketh away the sin of the world." At first, his 
views of the Saviour are confused and indistinct. 
He scarcely credits the evidence which he receives; 
and even doubts the readiness and willingness of 



70 



God to accept, through any mediation, a wretch 
so vile and worthless as himself. His character is 
minutely described in the seventh Chapter of St. 
Paul's epistle to the Romans, from verse the 10th, 
to the 24th. In these verses, there are not many 
passages that are inapplicable to his case ; and 
should they appear before him, he cannot but be 
astonished at the wonderful accuracy with which 
the secrets of his soul are delineated. 

Through the means which I have mentioned, 
and others that are of a similar nature, he soon 
obtains an acquaintance with those promises of 
rest which are made to the weary and the heavy- 
laden, through the blood of Him who came from 
heaven to seek and to save those who were lost. 
In viewing these promises, he is persuaded that he 
answers the character of those to whom they are 
made ; and catches from hence some glimmerings 
of faith and hope, which serve to interrupt the 
horrors of despair. To him this passage of scrip- 
ture is peculiarly applicable : " Who is among 
you, that feareth the Lord, that obeyeth the voice 
of his servant, that walketh in darkness, and hath 
no light ? Let him trust in the name of the Lord, 
and stay upon his God." (Isaiah, 1. 10.) He 
finds that the character described, is that which 
he answers; and he takes some encouragement 
from the invitation with which the passage closes. 

His want of the Saviour, and the suitableness 
which is given of him in the various representations 



71 



that he finds in scripture, — whether he views his 
divine character, the actions of his life, the love 
which he has manifested, the occasion and design 
of his death, his resurrection and ascension into glory, 
his numerous, various, and exceeding great and 
precious promises, or his positive declaration, that 
whosoever cometh to him he will in nowise cast 
out, — all conspire to cherish the dawnings of his 
faith, which may be compared to the smoking 
flax, or a broken reed. Urged onward by his ne- 
cessities, and allured by the promises of accept- 
ance, Christ now becomes the only object of his 
hope, and rises uppermost in all his thoughts. He 
seeks him above all things ; desires to obtain an 
interest in him ; prays that he may find, through 
his atoning sacrifice, a deliverance from his fears 
of punishment, and the wrath of God ; and feels 
increasing light break in upon his agonizing spirit. 
This is the light which shineth more and more to 
the perfect day. It is this light that enables him 
to believe that the promises of God are sure, that 
his mercies are from everlasting to everlasting, and 
that it is through the Lord's mercies that he is not 
consumed. With these views before him, he in- 
cludes himself in the number of those sinners for 
whom the Saviour died, and feels disposed to part 
with all for Christ. Thus circumstanced, he cries 
in his heart, " Lord, I believe, help thou mine un- 
belief/' and ventures upon him with an earnest 
expectation, and strong persuasion, that he shall 



72 



be received; and in that moment in which he 
ventures upon Christ, he is justified freely from all 
things, from which he could not he justified by the 
law of Moses. 

That this doctrine is perfectly congenial with 
what Mr. Fletcher, as well as Mr. Wesley, taught 
on these important subjects, the following passages 
will abundantly prove. " From what has been 
observed (says Mr. Fletcher,) it follows, that before 
any one can believe, in the gospel sense of the 
word, he must be convinced of sin by the Spirit 
of God. He must feel himself a guilty, lost, and 
helpless sinner, unable to recover the favour and 
image of God by his own strength and righteous- 
ness. (z\cts, ii. 37, 38.) 

u This conviction, and sense of guilt, make the 
sinner come weary and heavy-laden to Christ, 
earnestly claiming the rest which he offers to 
weary souls. (Matt. xi. 28.) This rest the mourner 
seeks with the contrite Publican, in the constant 
use of all the means of grace : endeavouring to 
bring forth fruit meet for repentance, till the same 
Spirit, that had convinced him of sin, and alarm- 
ed his drowsy conscience, convinces him also of 
righteousness (John, xvi. S.); that is, shews him 
the all- sufficiency of the Saviour's righteousness, 
to swallow up his unrighteousness; and the infinite 
value of Christ's meritorious death to atone for 
his unholy life ; enabling him to believe with the 
heart, and., consequently, to feel, under tha~ 



73 



Christian dispensation, that he has an interest 
in the Redeemer's blood and righteousness, or 
that he is savingly interested in the merit of all 
that the Son of God suffered, did, and continued 
to do for us." 

(Fletchers Works, vol. iv. p. 36. Pine's edition.) 

This same subject Mr. Fletcher again renews in 
a subsequent part of the same volume, when he thus 
addresses himself to a penitent mourner : u Thou 
deniest that loving Redeemer no longer, O thou poor 
mourning penitent, who art ready to sink under the 
burden of thy sins, and longest to find rest for thy 
dying soul. The Lord who pronounces thee blessed, 
says, Comfort ye, comfort ye, my mourning people. 
By whom shall L comfort thee ? Oh ! that it 
were by me ! Oh I that I were so happy as to 
administer one drop of gospel cordial to thy 
fainting spirit ! Thou hast received the wounding 
truths of the gospel, why shouldest thou reject 
the healing ones ? Thou hast eaten the bitter herbs 
of repentance : yea, thou preferrest them to all 
the sweets of sin : Why then, oh ! why should 
thy heart rise against the flesh and blood of the 
true paschal Lamb ? Why shouldest thou starve 
when all things are now ready ? Why shouldest 
thou not believe the whole truth as well as one 
part of it? Will the word of Gods grace be more, 
true ten years hence than it is now ? Is not Christ 
the same yesterday, to-day, and for ever ? If thy 
4m11 believing in God has already saved thee from* 

H 



74 

thy vain conversation, and thy outward sins ; trow 
much more will a cheerfal believing in the Lord 
Jesus, save thee into christian righteousness, 
peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost." 

(Fletcher's Essay on Truth, p. 144.) 

Thirdly, I proceed to the next question, What 
must the penitent believe in order to justification ? 

I have said, at the close of the last paragraph 
wjiich precedes my citations from Mr. Fletcher, 
that " the moment in which the mourner ventures 
on Christ, he is justified freely from all things 
from which he could not be justified by the law of 
Moses." But what I mean by " venturing on 
him," remains yet to be explained. The precise 
idea ; which I intended to convey by that expression^ 
it may, perhaps, be difficult to find words to com- 
municate ; but, a simile will afford assistance in 
supplying that defect. By venturing on Christ, 
I do not mean merely a giving credit to any soli- 
tary truth of the gospel, nor even to all the truths 
that it contains. This, without doubt, must be 
included; but by venturing on Christ, I mean 
something more. The force of evidence may 
operate on the understanding, and, finally, produce 
its full and unequivocal assent ; but the decisions 
of the judgment may be entire, without producing 
action, or affecting the heart. A full persuasion 
of any given truth may, and must produce assent, 
but it does not necessarily beget new resolutions. 
Gospel truths may be brought home, and person- 
ally applied by the proofs which support them, but 



75 



it will not follow that all who are thus convinced, 
have either ventured on Christ for pardon, of 
found redemption in his blood, even the forgive- 
ness of sins. Evidence can be received only by 
our reasoning faculties ; but the affections must 
be reached by a more powerful agent, and, in the 
great work of conversion, this agent is the Spirit 
r>f God. 

The soul of an awakened sinner, before it ven- 
tures on Christ for salvation, may be compared to 
a man who is in some of the upper stories of his 
house, when he learns that it has takeii fire, and 
that all its nether parts are so far involved inflame 
as to cut off his retreat. Perhaps, he makes use 
of several efforts to escape impending ruin, and 
ineffectually attempts to gain the door ; but find- 
ing the flames increase upon him, he is compelled 
to relinquish his hope of escaping this way, and 
to ascend the stairs before the pursuing fire. His* 
friends without, who know his condition and his* 
danger, entreat him to cast himself from the win- 
dow of the attic story, into which he has been 
driven, as the only means through which life can 
be preserved. The man within hears their earnest, 
entreaties ; hesitates, attempts, retires, approaches 
the window, calculates upon the height, dreads to 
make the effort, and again recedes. His under- 
standing is convinced that destruction must soon 
overtake him; and, yet, while the danger is some- 
what remote, he strangely lingers, though only to 



76 



contemplate the difficulty of escaping, and to hold 
communion with his woes. His friends, again, 
encourage him to venture at the window, assuring 
him that they have provided for his safety, by 
spreading on the ground the softest materials to 
break the violence of his fall. Full of hesitation, 
he asks for sensible evidence. They desire him to 
look. He makes an effort ; but the darkness of 
the night, and the injury which his sight has sus- 
tained, only permit him to view the object of his 
wishes obscurely and indistinctly. Belief and 
doubt contend for the empire of his mind, and, by 
preserving it in a dreadful equipoise, prevent it 
ixom making any decisive choice. 

Thus far the situation of this man resembles 
that of him who feels his want of Christ. The 
understandings of both are enlightened ; their 
judgments are equally convinced by the force of 
evidence ; they assent to the truths which are pro- 
posed for their belief 5 but still, neither of them 
has escaped to the place of safety or city of refuge, 
which lies before him. Both, however, have 
found the way to escape impending ruin; and to 
him who thus spiritually seeks after Christ, it may 
be said — Thou art not far from the kingdom of 
God, But still one thing is lacking ; and that is, 
to venture on the Saviour for salvation. My 
meaning in the use of these words, " venture on 
the Saviour," the remaining part of the simile will 
kelp to illustrate* 



77 



Hitherto I have presumed, that the man confined 
within the walls of the burning house has made 
no effectual effort to escape the increasing fire; 
hut the following observations will present us with 
a different view. While lingering here in this- 
state of indecision, agonizing for deliverance, 
without using the means to obtain it, feeling con- 
fidence in his friends below, but yet fearful to ven- 
ture, — the flames burst into his apartment, and 
scorch him in his last retreat. Alarmed at his 
immediate prospect of death, he concludes, If I 
remain here, I must die ; and l ean but perish if I 
fail in the experiment which my friends solicit 
me to make. Full of these persuasions he repairs 
once more to the window, and considers the diffi- 
culty less, and the prospect of safety greater, than 
what he had before imagined. Encouraged by 
these favourable appearances, as well as driven by 
terror, he commits his soul to God, and casts him- 
self among Jiis friends below. In a moment, in 
the twinkling of an eye, he reaches the object of 
his hopes, finds every thing prepared for his re- 
ception, as his friends had promised, and himself 
fixed in a state of safety. With tears of grateful 
joy, and a heart overflowing with thankfulness for 
his deliverance, he gives glory to God, and finds 
his bosom filled with peace. 

Such appears to be the case with every soul, 
that by faith ventures on the atoning sacrifice of 
Christ. This is what I mean by venturing on him. 



78 

But who can find words to express the idea? con- 
veyed in this simile ? Every one can feel them ; 
but adequate expressions are not to be found. 
Human language is too poor to unfold, in all their 
branches, the things of God; and we are under 
the necessity of resorting to such expedients, 
in order to find mediums to communicate ou£ 
'thoughts. 

In making a transfer of the analogy now before 
us, should it he inquired— In what stage of its 
progress is the soul justified ? I answer, not till it 
ventures on Christ for safety. For, as in the 
simile which I have introduced, the man in the 
burning apartment was not safe until he left the 
window, after which his friends became amenably 
for the circumstances of his attempt — so the soul 
that feels its want of the Saviour* is not in safety 
until it ventures on him for salvation. And, yet, 
if we credit the theory of Mr. Home, if the ana- 
logy will hold good, the man must have been in 
safety wMle he stayed in his burning apartment, 
merely because he felt his danger, and believed 
that his friends had made an ample provision for 
his reception. What, but this, are we to under- 
stand by the following words I " Repentance is 
regeneration, and regeneration repentance ; and 
to damn true penitents, is to damn those who are 
bom of the Spirit. W ell-instructed christians 
will have assurance; weak and ignorant christians 
liave it not. It is not essential to salvation ; but 



repentance .or regeneration is. Unless a man Be 
born again — unless he be a sincere penitent, he 
cannot see the kingdom of God, of grace, or 
glory " (p. 33.) A o*ain, in p. 68. he renews the 
same sentiment, and, without the least shadow of 
proof in either place, assumes that very position, 
which wanted evidence to support it : " I assume 
the fact, as acknowledged by all but mere sciolists 
in divinity, that conversion, repentance, and the 
new birth, substantially mean the same thing : the' 
turning of men from darkness to light, from sin to 
holiness, from Satan to God." 

Where Mr. Home learned, that " repentance 
is regeneration, and regeneration repentance," we 
do not know. Hitherto we have made no such 
discoveries in our bibles. And if he has been 
blessed with superior light, it would have been no 
deviation from that friendship which he professes 
for us, to have directed us to those sources of in- 
formation which he has had the happiness to ex- 
plore. The same obscurity conceals from my 
researches another of his observations — " That to 
be a sincere penitent is to be born again." In 
what portion of the sacred writings these two ideas 
are identified, I have not yet been able to discover ; 
and may, I hope, be permitted to retain my 
doubts of the fact without incurring the charge of 
obstinacy, till reason, or scripture, be produced in 
support of this naked assertion. To prevent aL 
doubts of these bold assumptions, and to impose 



SG 



silence on inquiry, Mr. H. modestly presumes, noc 
merely that " conversion, repentance, and the new 
birth, mean substantially the same thing," but that 
this fact is so well known, that none but " mere 
sciolists in divinity can refuse their acknowledg- 
ments of it." It would, certainly, be daring to 
question first principles ; but it would be extremely 
foolish to admit them as such, without either au- 
thoritative, rational, or intuitive knowledge, or 
evidence. Mr. H. has said, that these terms imply 
" the turning of men from darkness to light;" but 
how " repentance" means such a a turning from 
darkness to light," is a problem which he has not 
condescended to solve. We must, therefore, be 
content to rank among those sciolists in divinity, 
3vho refuse to subscribe to his solitary declaration, 
until he favours us with some glimpses of that 
Jight, by which he was " converted" to this strange 
article of his creed. 

That repentance is distinct from faith, is evident 
from the following scripture, " Repent ye, and 
believe the gospel.' 5 (Mark, i. 15.) And that it is 
distinct from conversion, these words inform us 
with equal plainness, " Repent ye, therefore, and 
be converted, that your sins may be blotted out." 
(Acts, iii. Now, if "repentance and conver- 

sion mean substantially the same thing," as Mr. 
H. asserts, Why, I would ask, does St. Paul dis^ 
tinguish between them ? If repentance and con- 
version be distinct, Mr. H.'s assertion is proved to 



81 



be erroneous ; if they be not distinct, the Apostle 
has been guilty of an unmeaning tautology, and 
has used language which " mere sciolists in divi- 
nity" cannot rescue from the charge of being delu- 
sive. It would be easy here to trace the hypothesis 
before us to many unpleasant consequences; but 
this must be reserved for a future consideration. It 
is sufficient for us at present, to know, that repent- 
ance is not faith ; and that conversion is distinct 
from both: that no one can be justified without 
venturing on the great Sacrifice for sin ; and that 
no man can be said thus to venture, until he is 
willing to part with every thing for Christ, who 
invites the weary and heavy-laden, and promises 
to give them rest when they come to him ; but 
w r ho has nowhere informed us, that " conversion, 
repentance, and the new birth/' either " substai> 
stantially" or unsubstantially, " mean the same 
thing." 

But, I return again to the question under consi* 
deration— What must the penitent believe in order 
to justification ? 

Hitherto the observations which I have made, 
have been confined solely to the gospel dispensa- 
tion, because to this alone they appear to be ex* 
clusively applicable. Nothing, however* can be 
farther from my thoughts than to suppose that all 
those must be excluded the kingdom of heaven, 
who, from the peculiarity of their conditions in 
Jife ; have nevei* beard the name of Jesus^ and ; con- 



82 



sequently, could never have an opportunity of ven- 
turing on his atoning sacrifice. On these points, 
permit me, in the views of Mr. Fletcher, to present 
you with a mirror of my own. 

" Are there not degrees of saving faith, inferior 
to the faith of the christian gospel ? And are not 
those degrees of faith consistent with the most 

o 

profound ignorance of the history of our Lord's 
sufferings, and, consequently, with any explicit 
knowledge of the atonement ? Although mankind 
in general had some consciousness of guilt, and a 
confused idea of propitiatory sacrifices ; and, al- 
though all the Jewish sacrifices and prophecies 
pointed to the great atonement; yet, how few, 
even among the pious Jews, had a clear belief 
that the Messiah would put away sin by the sacri- 
fice of himself? How unreasonable is it then to 
confine the gospel to the explicit knowledge of 
Christ's atoning sufferings, to which both the pro- 
phets and apostles were once such strangers ? Does 
not St. Peter intimate, that the prophets searched 
to little purpose, what the Spirit signified, when 
it testified before hand the sufferings of Christ ; 
since it was revealed to them, that not unto them- 
selves, but unto us, they did minister the things 
which are now reported in the christian gospel r 
(i Peter, i. 11, 12.) And how absurd is it to sup- 
pose, that nothing is gospel, but a doctrine, which 
the first preachers of the christian gospel knew 
little or nothing of, even while they preached the 



83 



gospel under our Lord's immediate direction ? Did 
not John the Baptist exceed, in evangelical know- 
ledge, all that were born of woman? Were the 
Apostles much inferior to him, when they had 
"been three years in Christ's school ? Did not our 
Lord say to them— -Blessed are your eyes for they 
see, and your ears for they hear \ for, verily, many 
prophets and righteous men have desired to see 
the things that you see and have not seen- them ; 
and to hear the things that ye hear, and have not 
heard them ? Again, did he not testify that in gene- 
ral they had justifying faith, i, e. faith working by 
love ? Did he not say, Now are ye clean through 
the word which I have spoken unto you — The 
Father himself loveth you, because you have loved 
me, and believed that I came forth from God? 
Najr, did he not send them forth two and two, to 
preach the gospel of the day: .The kingdom of 
heaven is at hand ; Repent, and believe the gos- 
pel ? And would he have sent them to preach a 
gospel to which they were utter strangers ? But 
were they not perfectly strangers to what passes 
now for the only gospel ? Had they the least idea 
that their Master's blood was to be shed for 
them, even after he had said, This is my blood of 
the New Testament, which is shed for you, and for 
many, for the remission of sins ? When he spoke 
to them of his sufferings, were they not so far 
from believing in the atonement which he was 
etbout to make ; that they were offended at the 



i 84 

very idea r Is not this evident from the words of 
Peter, their chief speaker,, who began to rebuke 
him, saying — Be it far from thee, Lord ; this shall 
not happen unto thee : i. e. we do not yet see 
the end of thy blood ? Nay, when Christ had 
actually shed it, and had finished the atoning 
work ; far from having the least notion about 
what is called " finished salvation'' and gospel 
in our day, did they not suppose that all their 
hopes were blasted, saying — We trusted that it 
had been he, who should have redeemed Israel ? 
From these observations may I not conclude, (1.) 
That an explicit knowledge of Christ's passion 
and atonement is the prerogative of the chris- 
tian gospel ? And (2.) that those who make it 
essential to the everlasting * gospel, doom to hell, 

* On the use of the term " everlasting gospel," as 
distinguished from christian gospel, Mr. Fletcher, in 
a preceding note, give* the following- explanation: " Lean- 
ing then (about eleven years before ) too much towards 
Calvinism, I fancied, at times at least, that the gospel 
was confined within the narrow limits of its last dispen- 
sation ; which was as absurd as if I had conceited, that 
the swell of our rivers at high water is all the ocean. But 
turning to my bible, and reviewing the whole affair, I 
clearly see, that the Jewish and Christian gospels are not 
the everlasting gosueU hut only two of its brightest dis- 
pensations. Should the reader ask me what I mean by the 
" everlasting gospel, 5 ' when I consider it in its fullest 
latitude : I answer, that I mean with St. Paul, The riches 
ef God's goodness, forbearance, and long suffering, lead- 



85 



not only all the righteous Jews, Turks, and Hea- 
thens, who may now be alive ; but almost all 
the believers who died before our Lord's cruci- 
fixion, and some of the disciples themselves after 
his resurrection ?" 

(Fletcher's Works, vol. iv. p. 36, 37.) 
From the various dispensations under which 
God, in different ages of the world, has been 
pleased to place mankind, it is obvious, that 
what may be an object of faith to one, cannot 
be so to others. " To establish," says Mr. Fletcher, 
" the doctrine of the gospel dispensations ; to show 
that saving truth, in its various manifestations, 
is the object of saving faith, I need only to 
prove, that a man, in order to his salvation, is 
bound to believe at one time what he was not 
bound to believe at another. Take one instance, 
out of many. If St. Peter had died just after he 
had been pronounced blessed for acknowledging 
that oui* Lord was the Son of God, he could not 
have been cursed with a " depart from me," Sec. 

ing men to repentance for Christ's sake, who, in all ages, 
is the Saviour of the world ; yea, and the severe strokes 
of his gracious providence driving them to it. I dare not 
insinuate that Jonah, one of the most successful preachers 
in the world, was not a gospel preacher, when he stirred 
up all the people of Niniveh to repentance ; and that St. 
John, the divine, was a stranger to true divinity, when he 
gave us the following account ; 1 saw another angel having 
the everlasting gospel," (p. 33. note.) 



85 



he Would have been saved : and, in that case, he 
would have obtained salvation without believing; 
one tittle about our Lord's resurrection ; and, 
nevertheless, St* Paul, a few years afterward, 
justly represented that article as essential to the 
salvation of those to whom it is revealed :"If thou 
shalt believe with thy heart that God hath raised 
the Lord Jesus from the dead, thou shalt be saved." 
Few people, I think, can read the Acts of the 
Apostles, without seeing, that the numerous con- 
versions wrought by St. Peter's preaching, were 
wrought by the force of this truth, " God hath 
raised up that Jesus whom ye have crucified :V a 
victorious truth this, which would have been a 
gross untruth three months before the day of 
Pentecost. Nay, what is at one time an article 
of saving faith, may at another time become an 
article of the most confirmed unbelief. Thus, the 
expectation of the Messiah, which was a capital 
article of the faith of the ancient Israelites, is, 
now the buttress of the Babel of modern Jews* 
The property of faith is then to make our hearts 
"bow to rhe truth, as it is manifested to us; it being 
evident, that God never blamed the children of 
men for not believing what was never revealed 
to them." 

(Fletcher's Works, vol. iv. p. 122.) 

These extracts will serve to shew the exten- 
siveness of our views, with respect to the various 
dispensations of the gospel, and the light in which 



87 



we behold the operations of saving faith. These 
are the doctrines which we both embrace and 
promulgate ; notwithstanding, we are accused by 
Mr. Home, of " cruelty butchering the firstlings 
" of the church on the bloody altars of Moloch 
and of " shutting the gates of mercy on man- 
* kind." 

On the manner in which penitents obtain de- 
liverance from their burdens, Mr. Fletcher speaks 
as follows; and the coincidence of his observations 
with what I have advanced, will prove that we have 
neither introduced a new doctrine, nor departed 
from that wdiich we are indiscreetly charged with 
having deserted. " The manner in which this 
deliverance is generally wrought, may be particu- 
larly described thus : Free grace, at sundry times, 
and in divers manners, speaks to our consciences ; 
recommending and enforcing the word u&h, the 
commandment which is everlasting life, if it is 
the day of provocation, we unnecessarily begin to 
make excuse: we cannot come to the manias - 
feast : we are either too good, too bad, or too 
busy to entertain the truth ; and ^ we say as civilly 
as Felix, go thy way for this time ; when I shall 
be fitter, or when I shall have a more convenient 
season, I will call for thee. Perhaps, we perversely 
harden our hearts, contradicting, or blaspheming. 
But if our free-willing soul knows the time of her 
visitation ; humbly bowling at the word of the 
Lord, and saying, as the V irgin Mary, behold the 



88 



hand-maid of the Lord, let it be done unto me 
according to thy word ; I am a lost sinner, but ' 
there is mercy with thee that thou may est be 
feared; then the seed of the kingdom is sown in 
an honest and good heart; for nothing is wanting 
to render the heart initially good and honest, but 
the submission of our free-will to that free-grace 
which courts us, and says, " Behold ! I stand at 
the door of every heart, and knock ; if any man 
hear my voice and open, I will come in and sup with 
him, and he with me." He shall taste how good 
the Lord is; he shall taste the good word of 
God, and the powers of the w r orld to come. 

" Thus opens the kingdom of God in the believ- 
ing soul: thus is Christ, the truth and the life, 
formed in the heart by faith : thus grace begins 
to reign through righteousness unto eternal life 
by Jesus Christ. 

" I call that faith saving and operative^ because, 
so long as it lives, it saves ; and so long as it saves, 
it works righteousness — -it works by a righteous 
fear of the evil denounced against sin ; by a righte- 
ous opposition to every known sin ; by a righteous 
hope of the good promised to obedience ; and by a 
righteous love of God. Therefore, when living faith 
ceases to w r ork, it dies away, as the heart that 
ceases to beat ; it goes out, as a candle that ceases 
to shine." (vol. iv. p. 1 17.) 

The precise ideas, which Mr. Fletcher intended 
to convey by these terms, " faith saving and ope/> 



alive" he fully explains in page 112, in which 
he directs us to the various dispensations of the 
gospel. This will appear evident from the title 
of the section of his work, which is as follows : 
" Truth cordially embraced by faith, saves under 
every dispensation of divine grace, though in 
different degrees. A short view of the truths- 
which characterize the four grand dispensations 
of the everlasting gospel 

" Faith is more or less operative, according to 
the quality of the truths which it embraces. This 
observation recommends itself to reason : for, as 
some wines are more generous, and some remedies 
more powerful, so some truths are more reviving 
and sanctifying, than others. But every evangelical 
truth being a beam of the Sun of Righteousness, 
risen upon us with healing in his wings, is of a 
saving nature ; the saving grace of God which hath 
appeared unto all men, teaching us to deny un- 
godliness, &c. and to live soberly, &c. Thus I 
am saved from ditheism, by heartily believing there 
is a God who will judge the world : — from Phari- 
saism, by firmly believing, that I am a miserable 
sinner, and that without Christ I can do nothing : 
— from Sadducekm, by truly believing that the 
Spirit itself helpeth my infirmities : — from Antino- 
mianism, by cordially believing that God is not 
a respecter of persons, but a rewarder of them 
that diligently seek him, and a punisher of all 
that presumptuously break his commandments 



95 



tind from Despair, by steadily believing, that God 
is love ; that he sent his only-begotten Son into 
the world to save that which was lost ; and that I 
have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ 
the righteous." (Vol. iv. p. 112.) 

Not many things can be more evident, both 
from the title which this section .bears, and .the 
above passages w r ith which it begins, than that 
Mr. F. designed, according to his own profession, ta 
show the manner in which faith saved, and saves, 
under every dispensation of divine grace. Yet 
none, we conceive, " but mere sciolists in divinity 1 * 
would conclude, that all those, who, under the 
christian dispensation, are saved from Atheism, 
Pharisaism, Sadduceism, Antinomianism and Des- 
pair, are actually in a state of justification before 
God. In what part of his writings, Mr. Fletcher 
has either asserted, or intimated, any such thing, it 
m incumbent on Mr. Home to point out; especially, 
as this is one of the passages which he has quot- 
ed, to prove that Mr. Fletcher did not hold Mr. 
Wesley's definition of justifying faith. 

That Mr. Fletcher, while encouraging awakened- 
sinners who had renounced their ungodliness, to 
venture on Jesus Christ, did not consider them 
in a state of justification,- is undeniable from 
his whole address to penitent mourners. One 
appropriate paragraph, I will transcribe. In this 
passage, had he espoused the doctrine which 
Mr. Home maintains, he could not have avoided. 



91 



an avowal of his sentiments, as it opens immedi- 
ately with an objection which Mr H. charges upon 
us. Had the excuse, or objection, been founded 
in error, Mr. F. was bound to obviate it. Had it 
been a false surmising, he was bound to detect it. 
Had it been built upon a suggestion of Satan, he 
was bound to expose it. Nor, as an honest man* 
could he have avoided it, if his sentiments had 
been such as Mr. H. has represented them. In- 
stead of this, he confirms the supposed error, 
acknowledges the fact, and directs the penitent 
how to obtain deliverance. But I will produce 
his own words. 

" Do not begin to make excuse, and say, * I 
must not believe the joyous truths of the gospel, 
till they are first powerfully applied to my soul.' 
It is right, very right for thee, for all, never to 
rest short of such an application. But how art 
thou to wait for it ? In the way of duty, or out of 
it ? Surely in the way of duty. And is it not thy 
duty, no longer to make God a liar ? Is it not thy 
bounden duty, as it is thy glorious privilege, to 
set thy seal, as thou canst, to the word of God's 
grace, as well as to the declaration of his justice? 
Does he not charge thee to believe (though it 
should be in hope against hope) the reviving re- 
cord which he has given of his Son ; that to as 
many as receive him, that is, to as many as believe 
on his name, he gives power to become the sons 
of God ?— That God commendeth his love towards 



92 

us, in that, when we were yet sinners, Christ died 
for us — That he was cleliyered for our offences, and 
raised again for our justification ? And that he even 
now maketh intercession for us; bearing us out of 
hell in the arms of his mercy ; and drawing all 
men to him who justifieth the ungodly, that re- 
nounce their ungodliness, as thou hast done, and 
believe in Jesus, as I want thee to doT (vol. iv. 
p. Mo.) 

Is this, I would ask, in an address to penitent 
mourners, the language of a man who thought 
them already justified by grace through the re- 
demption that is in Jesus : Could he tell them, in 
answer to an objection which he believed to be 
false, " It is right, very right for thee, for all,, 
never to rest short of such an application T Why 
did he not, while labouring to console their droop- 
ing spirits, inform them, " that to believe that 
Jesus Christ is the Son of God, is the grancf 
elemental, primary truth of Christianity; the living 
rock and foundation ef the church, against which, 
our Lord assures us, the gates of hell shall never 
prevail V Why did he not boldly declare, that * it 
involves in it, or necessarily draws after it, the 
belief, experience, and practice, of every gospel 
truth?" (Home, p. 15.) The reason why he 
applied no such lenitives is obvious. He was not 
disposed to lull them with a syren song; and durst 
not presume to speak peace, where he had no 
reason to believe that God had spoken it. Such 



93 



promises of the gospel as he thought applicable 
to their condition, he has held out for their en- 
couragement in this address,but has nowhere hinted 
that they were already justified, or that they had 
already so " believed in Jesus as he wanted them 
to do." 

The nature of this believing, or venturing on 
Christ, in order to justification, 1 have already 
stated and explained in the former part of this 
Letter, when describing the feelings and reforma- 
tion of an awakened sinner. I will now consider 
what objections may be advanced against it. 

In the first place, it may be said — a If the pro- 
u gress be as I have supposed, then justification 
u must be by works." I answer, this appears to 
be impossible. For though the character which I 
have described brought forth fruits meet for re- 
pentance, though he ceased to do evil, and learned 
to do well, yet none of these works w ere ever de- 
pended on for acceptance by a real penitent under 
the gospel dispensation ; and if they had been, they 
would have been renounced when the Saviour of the 
world appeared. When Christ appeared,every thing 
would have given way before his atoning sacrifice; and 
faith in his blood wouldhave finally eclipsed and swal- 
lowed up every other consideration. It is, there- 
fore, most erroneous to urge that we make good 
works the ground or condition of acceptance, or 
that the principle which we defend lead to any 
such conclusions, 



94 



'2dly, u But if he possessed all the qualifications 1 
which I have enumerated, "was he not justified 
a long before I have supposed ? And did not the 
u change which was manifested, rather result from, 
" than precede justification f" I answer, that 
this supposition appears to be equally as impossible 
as the former. In the sight of God, the motives 
from which the man's actions sprang, must be of 
much greater weight than the actions themselves ; 
for as God requireth truth in the inward parts, it 
is from the motive that the excellence or defect of 
the action must be denominated. This motive, I 
have asserted to be servile ; and, consequently, no 
action which resulted from it could, or can be the 
effect of justifying grace. Not only so, but these 
works preceded his view of the Saviour, and could 
no more result from justifying faith in him, than 
afford evidence of a previous justification. The 
supposition is, therefore, perfectly contradictory, 
because it makes works to result from justifying 
faith when they had a priority of existence. 

But, if the articles which I have enumerated, 
are too excellent and too numerous to precede jus- 
tification, which of them shall we discard r 'Surely 
repentance will not be dismissed. And nothing 
can be more injudicious than to retain the thing, 
and deny its fruits. Sincerity and earnestness are 
necessary to entitle either of them to respect ; and 
all admit, that faith is necessary in order to justi- 
fication. Shall we suppose that a sinner, priox 



95 



to his justification, does not cease to do 
evil and learn to do well ? This would flatly con- 
tradict Isaiah, i. 16, 17. Shall we suppose that 
he does not ask for mercy with earnest- 
ness ? To this Jeremiah has given a reply in these 
words, " And ye shall seek me, and find me, when 
ye shall search for me with all your heart." (Chap, 
xxix, 13,) In short, I see not a single qualifica- 
tion already mentioned, which is not necessary 
in order to justification. So that, place the impor- 
tant blessing wherever we please, repentance and 
faith must necessarily precede it, and these are 
all for which I contend. 

3dly, " Can that faith be either pleasing to God, 
u or justifying, which operates without love?" It 
must not be forgotten that the subject of our in- 
quiry is — What must a penitent believe in order 
to justification ? Now, it is certain, that our love 
to God cannot precede his love to ns, for, H we 
love him, because he first loved us." (1 John, 
iv. 19.) But we cannot love him, till by his Spirit 
we have obtained a manifestation of his love in 
Our hearts ; for love is one of the fruits of the 
Spirit. (Gal. v. 22.) Otherwise, salvation would 
not be of grace. Faith, therefore, cannot work by 
love, till the love of God is shed abroad in the 
heart by the Holy Ghost given, which is always, 
more or less, the necessary- consequence of justi- 
fying faith. But this, in the present case, cannot 
be;, because, this love presupposes justification, 



95 

which is the very blessing we now seelc. I grant, 
we may, even in this situation, feel a degree of 
gratitude towards God for preserving us, making 
such rich provision for us, giving us such encourag- 
ing promises to trust in his mercy, and keeping us 
from perdition. But this gratitude is founded on 
his prior mercy in providing for us, and revealing 
to us these inestimable blessings, and is distinct 
from that love which flows into, and from the 
heart, in consequence of our believing in Jesus for 
acceptance and justification. 

4thly, " Can that prayer be acceptable to God 
cc which arises from a servile principle r" In answer 
to this, I would ask — Is it possible that the prayer 
of an unjustified person can arise from any other 
source ? The person who seeks Christ may be 
desirous of a better motive ; but, until he is justified, 
he cannot obtain it. Let us only suppose that he 
has a better motive, and that he acts from it 
in order to attain the blessing — the plain con- 
sequence from this supposition is, that he must 
be justified in order to obtain justification, which 
is a plain contradiction. To discard a servile 
motive, will shut the door of mercy against the. 
human race. Servility is the best motive from 
which an unjustified person can act; and while he 
prays conscientiously, from the best that is within 
his reach, God, who is rich in mercy, will hearken 
to his petitions : for he is not an austere master, 
reaping where he has not sown, and gathering 



97 



where be has not strawed. Nothing can be mofe 
congenial to the tenor of the gospel, than that 
the tree must be made good, before the fruit can 
be good. If, therefore, we suppose the heart to 
he changed prior to justification, the uses and 
importance of this invaluable blessing are totally 
defeated, and rendered nugatory. Hence, we must 
join in a conclusion, which has been already quoted 
from Mr. Wesley, that " whatsoever good he hath, 
or doth, from that hour when he first believes in 
God through Christ, faith does not iind, but 
bring." 

5thly, " But can this account he reconciled 
" with Mr. Wesley's definition of justifying faith ?" 
Of this we shall see but little reason to entertain 
any doubts, when we consider the nature of that 
act of faith to which the definition is annexed. 
The act of which I have spoken, brings us to 
Christ for the blessing, and, as in the simile which 
I have introduced, terminates in its realization. 
The act by which it is realized, is distinct in the 
manner of its operation, from that by which we 
venture on the Saviour for pardon ; the one being 
prospective) and the other retrospective. The former 
is that by which we venture on Christ for the 
blessing, and the latter is that which brings with 
it an evidence that the blessing is actually obtained. 
It is to this latter, that Mr. W. has chiefly, though, 
not exclusively, confined his definition. The 
former may, perhaps, when compared with the 

F 



93 



latter, be not improperly denominated a faith of 
adventure and experiment which leads to ^he 
blessing, but brings no evidence whatever of its 
success, Whereas, the latter estimates the attain- 
ment, and appreciates the value of the former, 
lays hold on the blessing which it pursued, and, in 
conjunction with it, claims the denomination of 
4C justifying faith/' because it receives and secures 
the glorious prize. 

The point which is now before us, may be re- 
solved into this question — u Does justifying faith 
precede, or follow justification ?" I answer, that, 
according to my views, it does both : it begins 
before, and continues, and is completed after. So 
that justifying faith, in its most extensive accepta- 
tion, may be said* to be an act of adventure on 
Christ for mercy, and an act of realization. 
Neither of these acts or operations of faith, taken 
separately, to the exclusion of the other, can be 
said to be justifying faith ; but their conjunction 
renders it perfectly complete. Still, however, the 
former act, which is personally prospective, brings 
us to Christ, and is solely the condition of our accept- 
ance with him; nevertheless the latter alone can as- 
certain its nature, and hail with joy the Saviour of the 
world. It is through the former that Christ accepts 
us, and through the latter that we receive him. And, 
as no man can call Jesus Lord, but by the Holy 
Ghost, so no man has a right to conclude that 
he has justifying faith, till he has both ventur- 



99 



ed* on Christ, and laid hold upon him. This, there- 
fore includes both the prospective and retrospective 
operations ; and Mr. Wesley prudently made the 
completion of justifying faith the chief point m 
his definition. 

6thly, " But if a man die, while bringing fori?) 
" fruits meet for repentance, and exercising on 
£i Christ the prospective, without the retrospective 
44 act of faith, will his spirit be received into glory, 
44 or be banished into eternal woe V 9 Before it 

* Having repeatedly observed in the preceding letter, 
■that no genuine faith can exist, from which ever} degree of 
assurance is wholly excluded, Mr. Home, into whose hand* 
these papers may probably fail, Tvill be led to inquire, 
i; How can any degree of assurance be included in that 
branch of faith which I have denominated an act of adven- 
ture and experiment?" To this, I beg leave to reply ift 
the following observations : I do not consider the operative 
act, which is purely prospective, to be justifying faith, but 
only the direct branch of it, It is, therefore, unreasonable 
to expect, that what has been attributed only to the whole, 
should be included in a mode of operation which is con- 
fessedly but a part. Nevertheless, even this prospective 
act, unfinished as it is, is not without its degree of assur- 
ance. For as Christ is the great object on which we are 
called to venture, we must, before we can reasonably make 
the attempt, be assured of his existence— of his mediatorial 
character— of his veracity— of his promises — and of his 
readiness and willingness to save us.rNothing but this assur- 
ance can induce us to cast ourselves on his atoning sacrifice, 
with a full persuasion that he will in no wise cast us out < 
and, nothing but this persuasion can lead us to Christ for 
acceptance and pardon, 



100 



<!an become necessary to decide this question, it 
should be fully ascertained that the fact, is possible, 
which is here supposed. In my view, the question 
itself, though apparently reasonable and import- 
ant, is not more fanciful than absurd. Immediately 
when any soul believes in Christ for acceptance, it 
is received into the arms of his mercy. No 
assignable portion of duration can be supposed 
between venturing and acceptance; so that, in 
this circumstance, the case differs from the simile 
by which it was illustrated. A soul that ceases to 
seek, to strive, to agonize, or believe, may render 
its repentance ineffectual, and so perish by falling 
short of the mark. But, while it continues to 
depend on God, nothing shall hinder the work 
from being completed. " Shall I bring to the 
birth, and not cause to bring forth, saith the 
Lord : Shall I cause to bring forth, and shut the 
womb ? saith thy God." (Isaiah, lxvi. 9.) Nothing 
can be more dishonourable to God than such 
doubts as impeach his veracity, or question his 
willingness to save. Wherever a work of grace is 
really begun, it is God that has begun it ; and 
his faithfulness forbids him to suffer any soul to 
perish while earnestly seeking after his full salva- 
tion. 

7thly, " But is not this an adoption of the 
" subterfuge to which Calvinists resort, when they 
u tell us that David and Peter could not have died 
" in their apostacy r" By no means. The impossi- 



101 



fcility for which I contend, is not merely hypo- 
thetical, but real ; and is of such a nature as td 
leave no portion of duration in which such an 
event can possibly take place. Two moments 
which succeed each other, can allow no interval 
of duration between them. No event can there- 
fore happen where no duration exists. If an 
event take place, it must be in one moment or 
the other, but cannot be between them. When, 
therefore, the soul in any given moment ventures 
on Christ, in the next it is received ; and cannot 
possibly perish in an interval that does not exist. 

The same conclusions will hold good, if we ex- 
tend the observation from moments to minute* 
—to hours — weeks— months — or years. Is it 
possible, I would ask, for any man to die between 
the years 1809 and 1810? Everyman must an- 
swer in the negative, and, by so doing, will decide 
the question which we consider. As God has pro- 
mised to accept, and actually does accept, all 
those who repent and believe, immediately on 
their repentance and belief, it is as impossible that 
they can die in the interval, as that a man can die 
between the years 1809 and IB 10. Of these facts 
the reason is obvious. Wherever one moment or 
year ends, that which succeeds it begins ; and to 
suppose an event to happen between them, is to 
suppose that an event, to the accomplishment of 
which time is essentially necessary, can, and does 
actually take place, where no time can possibly 



102 

exist. In addition to this, both the justice and 
mercy of God forbid a soul to perish in such a 
state. If he has promised to be merciful to our 
unrighteousness, our sins and iniquities to re* 
member no more, and to cast out none who 
eome to him with broken and contrite hearts, can 
he be just, if when we come agreeably to his- own 
divine appointment, he treats us with neglect, and 
leaves us to perish r Salvation, we are fully assured, 
is promised to all who believe : But where can be 
the ground of our confidence in the veracity of 
God, if he refuse to accept us when we venture 
fey faith on the Atonement ? It is needless to say 
that that conduct must be inconsistent with mercy y 
which cannot be reconciled with moral justice ; 
and it is equally superfluous to add, that principles 
which lead to such conclusions want no further 
evidence to prove them wrong.. 

8thly, Finally, it may be asked — " Can an awak- 
u ened sinner perish while he is earnestly seeking 
" salvation through Christ?" This question has been, 
in part, already answered in reply to the preceding 
objection ; and what remains will not require many 
words. On this important point the scriptures are 
decisive, and leave no room for the introduction of 
other proof. No man can be in a state of salva- 
tion until he is justified ; and justification is by 
faith. He, therefore, who repents of his sins, and 
believes w r ith his heart unto righteousness, L e* 
ventures on the Atonement for acceptance, secures 



103 



to himself the favour of God ; but he who neglects 
this great salvation, excludes himself from the 
kingdom of heaven. Thus " he that believeth 
on the Son hath everlasting life : and he that 
believeth not the Son, shall not see life, but the 
wrath of God abideth on him." (John iii. 36.) 

We proceed, fourthly, to inquire What is jus- 
tifying faith ? 

Mr. Wesley's definition of this important doc- 
trine, I have already given at large, in his own 
words, in the preceding letter. The purport of 
this definition is, that " Jt is a sure trust and confi- 
dence, that God both hath aud will forgive our 
sins, that he hath accepted us again into his 
favour for the merits of Christ's death and passion," 
Mr. Fletcher, in answer to this question, u What 
is saving faith f observes as follows : " I dare not 
say, that it is- "only believing confidently that 
my sins are forgiven me for Christ's sake f J for if 
I live in sin, that belief is a destructive conceit, 
and not saving faith. Neither dare I say, that 
" saving faith is only a sure trust and confidence 
that Christ loved me, and gave himself for me:" 
for if I did, * I should damn almost all mankind 
for 4000 years. 

* On this passage, Mr. Fletcher has the following note, 
which most decidedly proves, that, instead of renouncing 
Mr. Wesley's definition of faith, as Mr. Home has, in 
several places, peremptorily asserted, and ineffectually 



104 



u To avoid putting the black mark of daiimsv 
lion upon any man^ that in any nation fears God 

attempted to prove, lie most cordially approved of it, and 
embraced it as applying to the christian dispensation. 
These are his own words : " When the Church of England 
44 and Mr. Wesley give us particular definitions of faith, 
44 it is plain that they consider it according to the christian 
" dispensation, the privileges of which must be principally 
" insisted upon among Christians \ and that our Church 
* 4 and Mr. Wesley guard faith against iUitinomianism, is 
*' evident from their maintaining, as well as St. Paul, that 
" by bad works we lose a good conscience, and make 
" shipwreck of faith.'* The above passages, to explain 
which Mr. Fletcher had inserted this note, have been 
quoted by Mr. Home ; and quoted as proofs that Mr. F. 
had explicitly declined Mr. Wesley's definition of faith. 
But this note, which must have been under his eye at 
the time when he wrote, is entirely passed over in silence. 
Indeed, to have introduced it would have bafiled his in- 
tentions. Mr. Fletcher's design was evidently this, to show 
how faith operates and saves under every dispensation of 
grace 5 to all of which dispensations he has fixed particular 
marks, and distinguished the christian dispensation from 
ail others. But Mr. H. regardless of these necessary dis- 
tinctions, has broken clown, or rather broken through, 
the barriers of separation, and represented Mr. F. as 
asserting that what was saving faith raider the Heathenish, 
Gentile, or Jewish dispensation, is saving faith under the 
Christian. Thus has he unwarrantably expanded what Mr. 
F. had restricted to his own definite limits., and (I believe, 
without, intention) made truth, in some instances, to be- 
come error, by giving to it an universality of application. It 
is from these unauthorised assumptions that he has injiidici- 
ausly inferred, that Mr. F. did explicitly renounce Mr. W.'s. 



105 



and works righteousness, I would chuse to say, 
that " saving faith is believing the saving truth 
with the heart unto internal, and, as we have- 
opportunity, unto external righteousness, accord- 
ing to our light and dispensation/' (vol. iv. 
p. 3 06.) 

Of these dispensations Mr. F. speaks in the 
next section ; together with the manner in which 
faith must be exercised on such truths as are 
proper to be embraced. He then concludes in 
the following manner : " This gospel, for example, 
" God hath made of one blood all nations of men, 
that they should seek the Lord as the gracious 
Author of their being, and love one another as 
brothers" — this everlasting gospel, I say, has in 
all countries leavened the hearts of pious heathens. 
This doctrine, Messiah will come to point out 
" clearly the way of salvation," added to the 
gospel of the Gentiles, has tinctured with superior 
goodness the hearts of believing Jews. This truth, 
" Messiah is come in the flesh," superadded to the 

definition ; notwithstanding the note which was then be- 
fore his face did recognize the definition, and assign 
to it its proper sphere of active operation, as being con- 
fined to the christian dispensation ; while he himself was 
speaking of that faith which was saying under inferior 
lights. It is not a greater mistake to suppose that Mr. F. 
had renounced the definition in question, than it would 
be to imagine that we have abandoned his doctrine of 
the inferior dispensations. 

1,5 



iOG 

Jewish gospel, has enlarged the hearts of all 
the disciples of John, or the babes in Christ. And 
these truths, " Christ died for my sins, and rose 
" again for my justification : He has ascended np 
" on high : He has received the gift of the Spirit 
u for men — forme : I believe on him by the power 
" of that Spirit : he dwells in my heart by faith : 
" He is in me the hope of glory : the promise 
" of the Father is fulfilled : thef kingdom of God, 
I* righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost, 
" is come with power :" these richer truths, I 
say, superadded to those which are essential 
to the inferior dispensations, tincture the hearts 
of all adult christians, and make them more or 
less intimately one with Christy according to 
the degree of their faith, and the influences of his 
Spirit." (vol. iv.p. 114,) 

Mr. Fletcher, in a preceding part of the same 
volume, thus minutely describes that faith which is 
imputed for righteousness, in the following words : 
" This lively faith, this faith working by love, 
is that which is imputed for righteousness, and 
that whereby the soul is born of God, according 
to the christian dispensation of the gospel. By 
this faith the believer being strongly united to 
Christ as a member to the body, becomes en« 
titled to a much larger share in the benefit of all 
that our Lord did and suffered; and, in consequence 
of this vital union with him, who is the source of all 
goodness, he derives a degree of power till then 



m 

107 

unknown, to do good works truly so-called:" (p. 37.) 
In this short paragraph Mr. F. positively asserts, 
that the " faith which is imputed for righteousness" 
is a faith which " works by love*" What can afford 
us a more decisive proof than this, that he did not 
renounce the definition ? If our love to God is 
the effect of his love towards us, as St. John 
asserts, then his love must be first manifested in 
order to excite ours. And, consequently, nothing 
short of a " sure trust and confidence" can be 
sufficient for the purpose. He, therefore, who 
conceives that we may have justifying faith while 
labouring under a sense of the divine displeasure, 
must conceive that the faith which is imputed for 
righteousness is a faith which works by terror ! 

Mr. Fletcher, in his address to penitent mourners, 
no where represents them as having that faith 
which works by love, which he has declared is 
imputed for righteousness. But he earnestly 
presses them to seek it, by every motive which 
truth and language can suggest, without once in- 
sinuating that they have already attained the 
blessings which he urges them to seek. On the 
contrary, in his address to christian believers, he 
considers them as having ventured on the Saviour, 
and laid hold on the glorious prize. " Ye taste 
those powers (of the world to come), happy believers 
(he observes,) who see that God is love — bound- 
less, free, redeeming, pardoning, comforting, sane- 



103 



tifvinglove in Jesus Christ. The more you- believe 
it, the more you feel it. Do then always the work 
of faith, and you shall always abound in the pa- 
tience of hope, and the labour of love. You have 
believed the truth ; and it has made you free : 
worship the God of truth ; triumph in Christ, the 
living truth ; and be daily baptized with the Spirit 
of truth : beware of enthusiasm : speak the words 
of soberness and truth : God is not the author of 
nonsense." (vol. iv. p. 150.) 

That those who labour and are heavy-laden 
must come to Christ in order to obtain rest, is the 
plain language of scripture. (Matt. xi. 28.) It is 
also equally evident, that those who thus come to 
him, must receive him in order to their becomiusr 
the sons of God. For " as many as received 
him, to them gave he power to become the sons 
of God, even to them that believe on his name." 
(John, i. 12.) The language of these two pas- 
sages plainly expresses the doctrine which Mr. 
Fletcher has inculcated in his addresses to penitent 
mourners, and to christian believers. The former, 
he earnestly exhorts to behold the Lamb of God 
who taketh away the sin of the world ; and the 
latter, he beseeches to stand fast in the liberty 
wherewith Christ had made them free. To such 
as feel the burden of their sins, and " walk in 
darkness, but havfe no light," all those invitations 
and promises are applicable, which can encourage 
xhem to " trust in the name of the Lord, and. 



109 

stay upon their God." They are not far from 
the kingdom of God, but they want to find an 
entrance : they are on the margin of the pool, 
but they want to step into it. Faith already 
begins to dawn in their souls, and to put forth 
its prospective operation. Still one thing is 
lacking. They want to venture on the Saviour, 
and to close in with the overtures of mercy. The 
instant this is done, God will lift upon them the 
light of his countenance, turn their darkness into 
light, and enable them to rejoice in his salvation. 
The prospective operation of unfinished justify- 
ing faith has already begotten in their souls " a 
sure trust and confidence that God, for Christ's 
sake, will forgive their sins." Now they rely on 
the atoning sacrifice of Christ, and feel the love 
of God shed abroad in their hearts. In the same 
moment justifying faith becomes mature, contem- 
plates the blessing which it has received, and 
begins to work by love. " This," as Mr. Fletcher 
observes, " is that faith which is imputed for 
righteousness," and is, as Mr. Wesley has ex- 
pressed himself in his definition, " a sure trust 
and confidence that a man hath in God, through 
Christ, that his sins are forgiven, and that he is 
reconciled to the divine favour." This is what I 
have in these letters denominated the retrospective, 
or reflex act of faith. 

That both of these operations of faith are 
necessary to constitute justifying faith, the nature 



110 

of justification seems to require. In order to the 
attainment of this blessing, there must be wrought 
in the soul a persuasion of its own helplessness and 
necessities ; a persuasion of Christ's power ; and 
such a confidence in his ability and readiness to 
pardon, as to induce a renunciation of every 
thing besides, and to beget a belief that shall 
terminate in a venture on his mercy. But this 
belief is not justification, for that is the pure act 
of God; nor is it the evidence of justification, 
because that must be retrospective, and this is 
prospective, f What then, it may be inquired, 
is the nature of this prospective belief ?" I answer, 
that it is that prospective operation of justifying 
faith which a penitent has when he comes to 
Christ for pardon. As an act of the mind, it is 
completely faith; but as u justifying faith," it is 
unfinished and indistinct. That the person who 
possesses it believes many gospel truths, is admit- 
ted ; and so far his faith is perfect. But, though 
he fears God, it is from a servile principle ; and, 
therefore, as " justifying faith," it is incomplete ; 
and were I called on to give it a name, I should 
denominate it, " the direct act, or prospective 
operation, of justifying faith." 

This " direct act," or " prospective operation of 
faith," is, however, the oi^ly condition which God 
requires of penitents in order to their acceptance 
with him ; and when it is so far matured that the 
soul is enabled to venture on the atonement, and 



Ill 



to rely on this alone for salvation, the penitent 
is justified freely by divine grace through the 
redemption that is in Jesus. Here the retrospec- 
tive operation, or reflex act of justifying faith 
begins ; it unites with the direct act which, 
went before; the prospective and retrospective 
branches meet together ; the sinner is accepted 
through the beloved ; and "justifying faith" 
becomes complete. Hence, when viewed in its 
consummation, we behold it as " a sure trust and 
u confidence that God both hath, and will forgive 
u our sins : that he hath accepted us again into 
a his favour for the merits of Christ's death and 
u passion," agreeably to Mr. Wesley's definition, 
and to the contents of that letter which we have 
already examined, in which Mr. Home fancies 
that Mr. W. had renounced it. 

That Mr. Wesley's Genesis Problematical or 
letter to his brother, was never designed by him 
as a full explanation of his sentiments on the 
important topics which he there proposes for 
examination and discussion, is evident from his 
own words in the first sentence : " A skeleton of 
this desideratum on justifying faith (he observes) 
which you may fill up, or any one that has leisure, 
I have roughly set down." To make this, there- 
fore, which he declares to be but " a skeleton, 
and that €i roughly set down" for others u to fill 
up," a full development of his principles, in all 
their parts, on the subjects of justification and 



112 



justifying faith, is to violate his own express de- 
claration, which stands at the head of the letter. 
And to place this incomplete delineation in op- 
position to principles which he had publicly avow- 
ed, afterwards inculcated, and nowhere abandoned, 
is such an extraordinary act of friendship in Mr. 
Home toward his memory, as furnishes the means 
of complaint, but leaves us at a loss to discover the 
occasion of our obligations to him. 

That the conclusions which I have drawn from 
premises which Mr. W. had laid down, will do 
more justice to his venerable memory, than those 
which compel us to suppose that he first advanced 
principles, which he afterwards relinquished on 
finding them erroneous, and that, finally, he re- 
adopted what he had at first rejected, and that too 
in opposition to his own positive declaration, is 
too evident to require proof. Yet, all this must be 
allowed/ if we admit what Mr. Home has advanced 
in his letters. We can nowhere gather from Mr.VvYs 
definition of justifying faith, or the uses to which 
lie has applied it, that he ever opposed the impor- 
tant truths contained in his Genesis Problematical 
Neither is it discoverable, either from the letter it- 
self, or any thing Mr. H. has been able to draw 
from it, that Mr, W. had relinquished his previous 
definition and adopted opposite principles, as Mr. 
H. has supposed. We cannot, therefore, but ex- 
press the deepest regret, that, under the sincerity s 
of friendship, he should resort to such unhappy 



113 



expedients to vindicate our common Friend ; and m 
reality, though without design, attempt to esta- 
blish positions which, if generally received, would 
not fail to make his memory appear ridiculous. 
Whereas, if he had only adverted to a few simple 
truths, which are in themselves incontrovertible, 
however much we may differ as to the appropria- 
tion of names, no room could have been found for 
the opposition which he has made. 

The few simple truths to which I allude, are 
those which I have already endeavoured to ex- 
plain. These are, that " justifying faith" consi- 
dered as complete, must have a direct and a reflex 
act, or, in other words, must operate in a prospec- 
tive and retrospective manner : — that the former is 
that by which we venture on Christ for pardon, and 
the latter is that by which the blessing is actually 
received. To the former of these, Mr. Wesley's 
Genesis Problematica appears chiefly to apply, and 
to the latter the general language of his definition : 
— a definition which he thought more properly 
placed where " justifying faith" received its con- 
summation, and could be fully embraced, than it 
could be any where else, while moving progress 
sively through the distinct stages of its unfinished 
operations. 

The definition of Mr. W. describes justifying 
faith to be " a sure trust and confidence that a man 
hath, and by the reflex act of faith we re- 

ceive Christ into our hearts. The former includes 



114 



a knowledge that " my sins are forgiven, and I am 
reconciled to the favour of God;" and the latter 
corroborates, by realizing it, the same important 
truth. Of the evidences which accompany this 
reflex act of faith, permit me to present you with * 
a, picture drawn by Mr. Home in a paragraph of 
his own book. This passage I insert with the 
greater pleasure, as it expresses at once both his 
sentiments and our own. 

" If I look into the gospel glass, my looking is 
a figure of my faith : for unless I look, I can neither 
see Christ nor myself. When I look, what do I 
see ? Christ crucified, and God in Christ recon- 
ciling the world, unto himself. My eyes, my soul, 
are fascinated with wonder and solemn delight* 
My heart melts, my eyes overflow, my head is as 
water, while I look on him whom I have pierced. 
The burden of guilt gently unlooses, and rolls into 
his quiet sepulchre, and the peace of God calms 
all the tumults of my breast. For a season, I am 
30 engaged in the contemplation of the heavenly 
vision, that I have no leisure to consider myself ; 
but, at length, I catch a glimpse of my own coun- 
tenance and image. I recognize the same features,, 
but how wonderfully are they changed. What a 
spirit is lighted up in those faded eyes. Peace is 
enthroned on the brow, so lately wrinkled by care, 
Celestial splendours play on my temples. All my 
gaping wounds are healed, and not a scar is left 
behind. My tattered filthy rags are exchanged 



ri5 

for a robe/- made white in the blood of the Lamb, 
Immortal vigour braces every nerve, I feel a piniofr 
in every limb, I tread in air, and Abba, Father ! 
spontaneously bursts from my loving heart. — And, 
what is the meaning of all this ? It means, that 
with open face I have been beholding as in a glass 
the glory of my Lord, and have been changed into 
the same image, from glory to glory, by the Sp> 
rit of the Lord. — This is a figure of the reflex act, 
the faith of assurance." (p. 20.) 

" Wherein then, it may be asked, if this para- 
graph expresses the sentiments of Mr. Horne, does 
he differ from us?" Alas ! I fear the picture which 
he has drawn is, according to his views, only ideal. 
It exists in his theory, but rather to amuse than 
edify ; and is better calculated to fill up a dreary 
blank in his page, than to be reduced to practical 
utility. He allows that this experience is the pri* 
vilege of christians, but a privilege which very few 
are permitted to enjoy ; and of those who profess 
to have attained it, he expresses many doubts of 
their sincerity. Were I to assert, that the Metho- 
dists can produce thousands of living witnesses, 
who thus know by experience that God is true, and 
who thus felt his power when they were justified 
through faith, Mr. H. would most probably accuse 
me of arrogance, and repeat the language of his 
fortieth page-—" We deny the facts you affirm, as 
well as your arrogant presumption." This glorious 
truth, however, is not to be so easily shaken. The 



116 



evidence which supports it, is too strong to be blown 
away with the breath of exclamation ; and I must 
rather submit to ungenerous imputations, than not 
testify what I know. 

Far be it from me, however, to insinuate, that 
all those who, we have reason to believe, are jus- 
tified freely by divine grace, through the redemp- 
tion that is in Jesus, enjoy in all their fulness, the 
moment they are justified, the blessings which Mr. 
Home has described. His description, neverthe- 
less, though so exalted, is realized by thousands, 
notwithstanding it has" been delivered in language 
so splendid and glowing, as apparently to put it 
out of the reach of all. Still, 1 say, we admit 
that there are multitudes, who, we believe, are in 
the favour of God, that come considerably short 
of this plenary assurance in justification. But 
this leads immediately to another inquiry. 

Fifthly, Does justifying faith bring with it any 
specific evidence ? 

I answer, if it brought no evidence, its existence 
could not be ascertained ; neither could we have 
any criterion by which faith could be distinguished 
from unbelief, or a state of justification from that 
of condemnation. And, perhaps, we cannot give 
a greater proof of human weakness, than to admit 
the existence of a fact, and yet deny the evidence 
by which that existence is ascertained. Yet, such 
must be our conduct, if we suppose that any one 
can be justified by faith, while he is labouring 



117 



under a sense of the divine displeasure. St. Paul 
says, that " being justified by faith, we have peace 
with God through our Lord Jesus Christ." (Rom. 
v. 1.) Here peace is introduced as an evidence of 
the blessing: and those who are entire strangers 
to it, have no reason to believe that they are in 
the favour of God, or accepted by him. Again, 
u to be carnally minded is death, but to be spiri- 
tually minded is life and peace." (Rom. viii. 6.) 
Here life and peace are placed before us as the evi- 
dences of spiritual mindedness, and directly oppos- 
ed to that death which results from, and accomoa* 
nies, the carnal mind. Again, u as many as are 
led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of 
God." (Rom. viii. 14.) Are any, I would ask, led 
by the Spirit of God, but those who have received 
Christ? And is it possible, that any can receive 
Christ, and be led (not awakened) by the Spirit 
of God, and yet have no knowledge or evidence 
of the fact? Surely this is impossible! Again, 
u he that believeth hath the witness in himself 
(1 John, v. 10.) and " the Spirit itself beareth 
witness with our spirit that we are the children of 
God." (Rom. viii. 16.) What evidences can be 
more direct and speciiic, than these which are 
here pointed out? They all conspire to establish 
the important truth for which I contend, namely, 
that justifying faith is always accompanied with an 
internal and external evidence. Thus God accepts 
and pardons, and then communicates these proofs 



118 



of what he has done. Hence the Spirit of aclo[> 
tion, as Mr. H. has justly observed, does not make 
or constitute us the children of God, but finds us 
already made so by the remission of sins which 
had previously taken place. H Because ye are 
sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Sou 
into your hearts." (Gal. iv. 6.) 

This evidence, which invariably accompanies jus- 
tifying faith, produces a change both in the heart 
and in the life. In the heart the principle has 
undergone an entire revolution. A dread of punish- 
ment gives place to love, and this becomes the 
great stimulus to action. The happy convert no 
longer obeys from an apprehension of wrath, but 
from a motive of grateful affection. He feels 
himself reconciled to God whose anger is turned 
away from him, and claims an interest in him 
through whom he had received the atonement. 
To others, the change which has taken place in 
his heart, is visible by that which is discovered in 
his life. In this he moves through all the paths of 
duty with alacrity, has power over those sins which 
before led him captive, and proves to all around 
him that the ways of religion are ways of pleasant- 
ness, and all her paths are peace. He no longer 
complains in the language of the Apostle, " when 
I would do good, evil is present with me," but 
u thanks God who giveth him the victory through 
our Lord Jesus Christ." He takes the laws of 
God for his guide, and walks in all the ordinances 



of the Lord blameless, does good to his fellow* 
creatures from pure motives, out of faith unfeigned, 
and so causes his light to shine before men, that 
others seeing his good works are led to glorify his 
Father who is in heaven. Here then is an inter- 
nal evidence that the heart is changed, an evidence 
which reaches to the conversation, and influences 
the life, and thereby affords proof that aid thing* 
are passed away. 

But, sixthly, Is this evidence known ? 

I answer, to admit the existence of evidence is 
to acknowledge that it is known to all those to 
whom it is evidence : and so far as it is unknown, 
it has no existence. A change from fear to love — 
from sorrow to joy — from anguish to peace — and 
from expectation to possession, can never exist 
where it is wholly unknown. No man can pas* 
through this change in his moral relation to God> 
a change which brings with it such decisive marks 
of intellectual and external evidence, and yet re- 
main totally unconscious of the fact. 

But, seventhly, " Are all those who are awaken* 
" ed by the Spirit of God, at the same time ge- 
" nuine believers in Jesus Christ ?" 

It is on this important question, which yet re- 
mains to be decided, that we are chiefly at issue. 
That repentance and faith are in their natures dis- 
tinct from each other, is evident from Mark, i. 15, 
as I have already noticed, where the necessity of 
both is distinctly enforced : and that the deepest 



remorse for sin is not necessarily connected with 
faith, is demonstrable from the case of Judas, who 
had the former without the latter, and from that 
of Simon Magus, who had the latter without the 
former. These cases, I think, will leave no room 
for dispute. And why repentance and faith should 
be thought by Mr. H. to be so inseparably con- 
nected together in all true penitents, that " re- 
pentance is regeneration, and regeneration is re- 
pentance ; and that a]} true penitents are born of 
the Spirit/' as he asserts, (p. 33.) I am not, per- 
haps, more at a loss to know, than he will be to 
prove. 

St. Paul, in defining faith, tells us, that it is the 
substance of things hoped for, the evidence of 
things not seen. (Heb. xi. 1.) Now, how any 
thing, of which I am wholly unconscious, can be to 
me an evidence, is extremely problematical, — I 
might have said perfectly contradictory. To admit 
it under these circumstances, T must decide against 
my owm convictions ; acknowledge an influence 
w : hich I do not feel ; and be guided by the light of 
an intellectual evidence which is totally unper- 
ceived. In short, I must acknowledge and disown 
the impression of the evidence at tile same time. 
But this faith St. Paul represents as " a substance/ 1 
Can thein any man possess a substance and not 
know it? If so, upon what grounds, I would 
ask, can his possession be ascertained ? Can ano- 
ther person know those internal feelings of his soul, 



421 



t>f which even he himself is unconscious? Surely 
this is impos-sitle. 

True penitence, wherever it exists, implies a 
godly sorrow for sin; bat faith forms no part 
whatever of that idea. Whenever justifying 
faith is realized in the heart of the penitent, he 
assumes a distinct character, commencing a jus- 
tified believer in Christ. In the former state he 
is broken down, but not built up ; wounded, but 
not healed ; killed, but not made alive. But, 
whenever the latter character commences, he be- 
glus a life cf justifying faith in the Son of God, 
who loved him, and gave himself for him. 

To awakened sinners and all sincere penitents, 
instead of terrifying them " with damnatory 
clauses," as Mr. Home asserts, we endeavour 
to show the Lamb of God who taketh away the 
sin of the world. With Mr. II. we believe, " the 
moment sinners fly to Christ, they are justified." 
(p. 2o.) And in order to this, all we insist upon 
is, to feel our want of Christ, and to be trifling 
to receive him on his own terms. We believe 
first in Christ for pardon; and then we believe, 
that, so trusting in Christ (?'. e. venturing on him), 
we are actually pardoned by our faithful God. 
Without this previous trust in Christ, we insist 
we can have no sense of pardon, no experiment 
tal knowledge of any Holy Ghost witnessing 
that pardon, either directly or indirectly." (p t 
16, 17.) 

G 



122 



As Mr. H. may not be displeased to see me 
republish, in his own words, a sentiment which 
both of our creeds embrace, 1 shall conclude 
this long letter with subscribing myself, 

Dear Brethren, 
Yours 

Affectionately 

And faithfully, 



To COKE. 



LETTER III. 



BELOVED BRETHREN^ 

iMER. Home, in his second Letter, seems de- 
termined to enlist both the Mr. Wesleys on his 
side. He, therefore, observes as follows : " So 
far was Mr. C. Wesley from denouncing wrath 
on sincere penitents, that while urging them to a 
more luminous and explicit faith, he comfortecf 
them by insinuating that they were in a sahahle 
state. He told them that they had the faith of 
God's servants, thought they were not yet sealed 
as his sons by the loving spirit of adoption." (p. 
28.) Unfortunately, Mr. H. has here introduced 
too much to serve his purpose; and had he intro- 
duced less, his naked assertions would have been 
falsified by fact, and rendered nearly unintelli- 
gible. 

Why Mr. C. Wesley, or any other man, should 
iC denounce wrath" on sincere penitents, it wil} 
be hard to find a reason; and still harder for Mr. 
H. to prove that we are guilty of the charge* We* 



124 



know that God has directed his servants to preach 
glad tidings to the meek, to bind up the broken- 
hearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and 
the opening of the prison to them that are bound. 
(Isa, Ixi. 1.) But he has no more directed them 
to denounce wrath on such characters, than he has 
in the above passage commanded them to tell the 
broken-hearted that they are already bound up, 
that those who are captives are already liberated, 
or that those are perfectly free who are actually 
bound. To the former charge we plead not guilty ; 
and of the latter crime, Mr. H. will, perhaps, be 
the last man to accuse us. 

But Mr. C. W., it seems, urged u sincere peni- 
tents to a more luminous and explicit faith." This 
has an unfavourable aspect on the cause which it 
was produced to serve. If he had thought, as 
Mr. II. more than insinuates, that all sincere peni- 
tents are actually in a state of justification, what 
necessity could he have been under for urging them 
to seek after a more explicit faith ? He might, 
indeed, have told them that a more explicit faith 
was their privilege; but, by relinquishing the most 
powerful of all motives, he could not have urged 
it as their indispensable duty. He might have 
asserted that it was profitable, but he could not 
have insisted that it was necessary. He might 
have affirmed, that neither " an explicit faith," nor 
" an explicit assurance was essential" to their fu* 
lure happiness ; that they already possessed the in* 



125 



estimable passport ; that " repentance is regene- 
ration;, and regeneration repentance ; and that those 
who have it are born of the spirit." (p, 33.) 

Instead,, however, of holding out any such de- 
lusive doctrine, he only " comforted them by in- 
sinuating that they were in a salvable state/' " and" 
not, as Mr. H. asserts, p. 38, " consequently 
in Christ." Surely, if Mr. H. had been aware of 
the import of what he has presumed Mr. C. W. 
to assert, he would most probably have ranked him 
with " greyheaded definition men," or have ran- 
sacked his writings for an expression which would 
not have frowned so terribly on his attempt. Are 
those, I ask, who are only in a " salvable state," 
people who are actually saved? If so, how can 
both terms be applicable to them ? If not, for 
what purpose has Mr. H. introduced the sentiment 
of Mr. C. Wesley ? Are the terms salvable and 
saved of synonymous import ? If so, then possi- 
bility and accomplishment must mean the same 
thing. This, we presume, is what few will have 
the. hardihood to assei 't } and fewer still the inge- 
nuity to prove. Yet the synonymous import of 
these words must be understood and made to ap- 
pear by Mr. H. in order to answer the design for 
which he has brought them. And in proportion 
as he fails in the accomplishment of this under- 
taking, Mr. C. W,, instead of serv ing his purpose, 
becomes an evidence against him in this very 



120 



passage which is cited to prove his approbation 
and favor. 

Few, we presume, will be inclined to doubt- 
that Mr. H. has here produced from the views of 
Mr. C. W. what he thought most subservient to 
his own designs ; for surely that which is the most 
pointed^ must be the most impressive. If, there- 
fore, a sentiment which professes to be selected 
without being specifically quoted from any part of 
his works, deserts the cause which it was intended 
to uphold, the inference is not unfair, even from 
his own ground — that Mr. Wesley is not friendly 
to the service into which he is so violently im* 
pressed. Tor certain it is, that the language 
which is brought to display his views of the sub- 
ject under consideration, instead of expressing 
what Mr. H. intended, implies exactly the reverse, 
and cannot be brought to coalesce with an opinion 
to which it is so decidedly repugnant. 

But " he told them (it seems) that they had 
the faith of God's servants, though they were not 
yet sealed as his sons," See. Are those then the 
sons of God, who have not the faith of sons ? Or 
can it be supposed that Mr. C. W. imagined those 
penitent mourners to possess the true christian 
faith, because he declared that they had the faith 
•f God's servants ? On the contrary, is not this 
jmore than a presumptive proof that he had an eye 
to those dispensations of the gospel, of which Mr* 



127 

H. has entirely lost sight? This is inferible frota 
his own observations. It is the difference in the 
dispensations, which gives rise to this difference 
in character ; and upon this variety is founded the 
appellation of servant, as distinguished from son* 
which Mr. C. W. has used. But of this distinc- 
tion we shall soon have an occasion to speak at 
large. I will only observe, at present, that it 
could not have served Mr. Home's purpose worse, 
if he had o A uoted the first verse in Genesis—" In 
the beginning God created the heaven and the 
earth." This, indeed, would have been wholly 
inapplicable, but it V/ould only have proved a 
harmless blunder. Whereas the sentiments which 
he has produced, and justly attributed to Mr. C 
Wesley, declare war against himself while he 
courts an alliance with them, and without solici- 
tation inculcate the doctrines which Mr. H. op- 
poses, and which we espouse. 

From this unsuccessful attempt on the views of 
Mr. C.Wesley, Mr. H. once more appeals to those 
of Mr. John Wesley, and refers us to a few expres- 
sions which occur in his journals. From a solitary 
paragraph it appears, that in his early experience 
he wrote some bitter things against himself, and 

o o 

that he entertained, at intervals, some doubts of the 
reality of his own conversion, though he had 
crossed the Atlantic to preach salvation to others ; 
— That from this severity he afterwards relaxed, 
and doubted whether the sever® sentence wliich at 



128 



i former period he had been induced to pass upon 
himself, was just; and in if 74, declared that when 
he went to America, he thought he had the faith 
of a servant, though not. that of a son of God, 
But I will insert Mr. H/s own words: 

■* Dr. Coke and Mr. Moore, referring to the 
same circumstance, tell us in a note, u Mr. Wesley 
acknowledged many years after this, that some of 
his expressions in the above account concerning 
&is state when under the law, were too strong ; that 
he was then in a state of salvation as a servant, 
but net as a child of God ; and that he had a 
measure of faith, but not the proper christian faith." 
Thus is this important factj that Mr. Wesley did 
retract his condemnation of himself, established 
in the lips of his three Biographers (viz. White^ 
head, Moore, and Coke"*), 

* The personal reflections and aspersions which apply 
to myself, I consider to be of little moment. I do not 
pretend to infallibility : and it is not improbable, but in 
earnestly pressing sinners to come to Christ, I have made 
use of occasional expressions, which on a strict review 
may be found too strong. But, as Mr. H. has adduced no 
specific charges, it is impossible for me to give any specific 
answer. General censures are nearly allied to personal 
calumny. One instance, indeed, and only one, is brought 
forward to substantiate the heavy charges with which I am 
loaded. This is not taken from my writings, but from an 
extempore discourse purported to have been delivered 
many years since, but at an undetermined period, before a 
congregation at Macclesfield* Evidence, one would think, 



129 



What it is that constitutes the " importance" of 
this H circumstance/' seems extremely obscure. It 
unfolds nothing more than what every day pre- 

G 5 

.must be extremely scarce, to compel Mr. H. to resort to 
such peculiar expedients. 

Mr. H., however, ought to know, that the characters of 
individuals are not to he estimated by solitary instances, 
admitting ihem to be genuine, hut by general conduct. I 
therefore refer him to my Commentary on the Bible, and 
defy him to bring, from the six quarto volumes, a single 
expression which w ill either sanction or confirm the pointed 
accusations of severity, which throughout his book he has 
brought against me. This reference I conceive to be fairer 
than the method to which he has resorted, of forming 
from the records of memory, through an undefined series 
of years, a general charge founded on an instance, which, 
if I have no right to call dubious, I have an undoubted 
one to denominate solitary. • 

What beneficial consequences can resale from such a 
mode of proceeding, 1 cannot say. But few, who arc ac- 
quainted with the human heart, can be at a loss to know, 
that it is calculated to strengthen prejudice, and throw 
stunihhng-biocks in the way of those who are already ene- 
mies to the gospel of Jesus Christ. Mr. H. sterns to have 
made no allowances for the imperfection or treachery of 
his own memory, nor for the force of his imagination, I 
have, however, the charity to hope, that when he coolly 
reflects, he will no* think himself infallible, any more than 
those whom he opposes, though he may hesitate to follow 
the example we have set before him; namely, that on a 
str ct review he may finii some of his expressions too strong. 
These are the only remarks which I intend to make on his 
numerous and severe personalities. 



130 



sents to cur view : and only serves to confirm us In 
what all acknowledge — that none are infallible but 
God. Is there anv thins: wonderful that Mr. Wes- 
lev, any more than another man, should occasionally 
express himself too strongly? Or, that having thus 
I expressed himself, he should, on receiving further 
light, use terms to soften the force of what he had 
previously advanced ? Does this furnish matter 
for triumph? Surely not; but, on the contrary, 
it discovers a dignified mind, ardently searching 
after truth, anxious to obtain it, and ready to em- 
brace it though under the most disadvantageous 
circumstances. Instead, therefore, of furnishing Mr. 
H. with an occasion of joy at the important disco- 
verv which he has made, the case which he has 
adduced presents us with a source more pregnant 
with argument that Mr. W. did not alter his 

o 

sentiments respecting justifying faith, than any 
thing which Mr. H. has produced, or we believe 
is able to produce, to prove the contrary. 

In the case now before us, we behold a frankness 
of communication which we can but rarely find, 
and an unreservedness of soul which timid spirits 
are unable to display; and from these circumstan- 
ces, as well as from his general character, we are 
even compelled to infer, that if he had in reality, in 
any subsequent period of his life, abandoned the 
definition of justifying faith which he had adopted 
from the established church, of which Mr. Home 
is a minister, he would have proclaimed it as on 



131 



the house-top, in language too conspicuous to- 
have been unnoticed, and too expressive to be mis- 
understood. In fact, such an entire revolution must 
liave been thereby made in almost all his writings 
(for with nearly the whole is the definition interwo-* 
ven),as would have given a new turn to his thoughts, 
and have left but little resemblance between 
the new and old editions of his works. Instead of 
this, alfhis sermons, amidst the numerous revisions 
and editions which they underwent under his own 
immediate inspection, continue radically the same 
as they originally were: and the doctrines in ques- 
tion, though examined by him with the most scru- 
pulous exactness, remained during his life totally 
unaltered, and continue the same to the present day. 
* That Mr. Wesley/' says Mr. Benson, " did not alter 
his sentiments, as contained in his sermons, towards 
the close of his life, may be most unequivocally 
proved, hy the very remarkable legacy which he 
left to each of the travelling preachers who should 
remain in the connection six months after his 
decease : " I give to each of these preachers, as 
a little token of my love, the eight volumes of 
sermons." This was the last legacy in his will., 
and (except the appointment of his executors) the 
last sentence. With his dying breath, as it were, 
he recognizes these sermons, some of which, it 
must be remembered, were written only a few years 
before his death, and published in our Magazine ; 
and he leaves them all unaltered, as a token of 



132 



his love, and, modestly, as a standard of the doc* 
trines which, he judged, flight still to be preach- 
ed by his successors. Mr. Wesley had too 
great a mind, to perform this last act without due 
solemnity and deliberation. His will tfcas dated 
Feb. GO, 1789, only two years before his decease. 
I would here recommend the consideration of 
the above circumstance to the writer of that 
unwarranted attack upon the Methodists, con- 
tained in page 609 of The Christian Observer, for 
the month of October 1803 : wherein he charges 
them " with now generally holding doctrines, re* 
specting the knowledge of salvation by the for- 
giveness of sins, which, he says, were distinctly 
opposed by Mr. Charles Wesley, Mr. Fletcher of 
Madeley, and in the latter part of his life by 
Mr. John Wesley." Let the writer of that para- 
graph know, that however u credibly" he may think 
lie has been informed of this, he has been ??iisin- 
formcd. The sentiments which the Methodist so- 
cieties' hold on this subject, are the veiy same that 
they have held from the beginning ; and are so 
far from being opposed by the pious and well 
informed ministers of Christ just mentioned, that 
their writings are considered and appealed to 
by us, as the most clear elucidation and best 
defence which we have, next to the scriptures, 
of our views on that subject. And we might 
challenge those who make such groundless as~ 
sertions to produce one single paragraph from 



133 



any part of their numerous publications in prose 
or verse, in proof of them, Examples to the 
contrary, if need were, might be produced in 
great abundance. I shall only add, that i myself 
was intimate^ with them all, and with the Eev. 
John Wesley in particular, for above thirty years, 
and can testify that there is not the shadow of 
a foundation for any such opinion. There are 
also many others of the brethren remaining 
to this present time, who can bear the game 
testimony." (Inspector of Methodism inspected^ 
p. 31.) ' 

Now, under these circumstances, I would ap- 
peal to any honest man, nay, I would appeal 
even to prejudice itself, whether the facts be* 
fore us do not furnish a decisive proof that no 
such alteration did take place in Mr. Wesley's 
sentiments as Mr. H. has supposed! And I fur- 
thermore appeal, either to the same character or 
to any other, whether it is probable, or even 
morally possible, that Mr. W. should have re- 
vised the editions of his sermons, as well as 
made additions to them, and have suffered the 
whole to remain unaltered, if his views of these 
important doctrines were changed. 

It may indeed be said, that 66 a letter writ- 
ten so early as "1747 might have escaped his 
memory." I grant the fact. But I would again ask 
< — did the new doctrine which the letter is sup- 
posed to contain escape his memory also? This 



134 



I think will hardly be asserted. But even 
admitting this to be the eas-e, must not the 
revision of his sermons have recalled it to his 
recollection ? And in either case, could he, as an 
honest man, have omitted to introduce an ac- 
count of a change so radical, as to subvert a 
doctrine which he had been accustomed to deem 
of the last importance, and to substitute one 
nearly the reverse in its stead? That he has not 
thus acted, is an undeniable fact. But that he 
would have done so, if the change had taken 
place which has been supposed, we are warranted 
in concluding, from the readiness with which he 
retracted the error that respected himself, the 
instant he saw his previous observations in an 
unfavourable light. 

A solitary paper may easily be presumed to 
have been forgotten, and incidental thoughts 
may without difficulty be erased from the me- 
mory. But a doctrine which to Mr. Wesley 
must have been always present in view, from 
the first moment in which he is fancied to have 
embraced it, to the latest period of his life, 
could not thus be lost. Christianity was his con- 
stant study, his perpetual delight, and his daily 
care. Justification and justifying faith are 
some of its most leading doctrines, and are in- 
terwoven with almost every other, and therefore 
couid not long be absent from his thoughts. 
And it seems equally as probable, that Sir Isaac 



135 



Newton, while in the career of his studies^ 
should have abandoned the doctrine of attrac- 
tion, without making it known in his future 
works ; as that Mr. W. should renounce his defini- 
tion of justifying faith, and express himself on the 
subject in such a questionable manner, that only 
a few solitary individuals should be able to make 
the discovery. And what adds to the astonishment 
is, that his discovery should be made in direct op- 
position to his own express declarations, and to 
the general tenor of his voluminous works. 

A further evidence, that forgetfulness could not 
have imposed the silence which is observable 
in many places of Mr. W.'s writings, is, that his 
new ideas of these doctrines must have been 
founded on a discovery of the errors of his old 
ones. Both, therefore, must have been presented 
together, aud have kept each other alive by the 
perpetual contrast which they must have exhi- 
bited to his mind. We cannot, therefore, avoid 
thinking, that every opportunity would have been 
embraced by him of exposing the fallacies, and 
of guarding his followers from the delusions, which 
had so strangely imposed upon himself. He would 
have erected marks, and established rules, or at 
least would have attempted so to do, by which 
deception might have been known; and would 
have assigned reasons for his conduct, in embrac- 
ing error and then renouncing it. Indeed, his 
recantation would have borne some resemblance 
to Mr. Home's book ; if we make a proper 



136 

allowance for the coarse expressions with wiiieh 
it is disfigured. But instead of this, his defini- 
tion stands ih its original form. ISot a single 
word* has sustained aijy alteration. The same 
doctrines have heen invariably inculcated frorn 
first to last; and we are even driven to con- 
dude, that no such alteration did take place in 
his sentiments as Mr. Home has asserted. 

But why, it may be asked, does Mr. H. seem 
so solicitous to ascertain what he denominates 
this " important fact," namely, that Mr. W. did 
retract " his condemnation of himself?" The rea- 
son is obvious. It furnishes him with an oppor- 
nity for questioning Mr. Ws. judgment, and for 
raising suspicions on the propriety of his definition 
of justifying faith : While, in addition to this, 
the rigour with which Mr. W. spoke of himself 
in the early periods of his experience, gives a 
sanction to those accusations of severity which we 
are charged with retaining, and to which Mr. II. 
has annexed the appellation of " damnatory 
clause." " Can we wonder (says Mr. H.) if, after 
this unwarrantable condemnation of himself, Mr. 
L esley was prepared to adopt a definition, which, 
by inevitable consequences, obliged him to deal out 
the same hard measure on all his hearers ? Or, that 
he continued thus infatuated until 1747, when, 
from his letter to his brother, we learn that he re- 
linquished both ? From that time, I presume, he 
began to entertain more favourable ideas of \m 



137 



state when he went to Georgia; and to abstain 
from pronouncing God's curse on truly serious 
characters, merely for the devil-invented sin of 
non-assurance." (p. 31, 32.) That u the same hard 
.measure" is an " inevitable consequence of the 
definition," is a position which yet remains for 
Mr. H. to prove, and for me to learn. It is cer- 
tain, that it did not appear so to Mr. Wesley, be- 
cause he partially retracted the one, but invariably 
retained the other. Whereas, had he perceived 
that " inevitable" connection of which Mr. H. 
has spoken, both cause and consec-uence must 
have participated in the common revision. To 
this conclusion I am far from expecting that Mr. 
H. will accede ; on the contrary, I should not be 
surprised were he to accuse me of assuming the 
very position which he has been controverting. 
I am willing to admit the force of his observations; 
and will readily acknowledge them to be applica- 
ble, as soon as he has overturned the arguments 
which I have advanced and may advance in these 
letters, to secure the ground on which I now take 
my stand. And, before he attempts to inveigh 
against the % dreadful consequences" which the 
definition involves, he would do well to consider, 
whether his declamations will not set in with full 
tide against the word of God. There is a spurious 
philanthropy to which the sacred writings are a 
stranger, which appears extremely captivating to 
the carnal mind, and which rarely fails to be po- 



138 



pular in proportion as it aims to extend the em* 
pire of mercy at the expence of justice. 1 will 
not accuse Mr. H. with intentionally pleading the 
cause of unlicensed liberality, because I am satis- 
fied that he had no such design. But, should he 
on a cool and dispassionate survey of his work, 
be inclined to think that he has advanced prin- 
ciples which may be easily made subservient to 
the purposes of unrestrained thinking, I can assure 
him that he will be by no means singular in his 
discover}^. 

But even admitting that Mr. W. might have 
been induced, from his own personal severity to- 
wards himself, " to deal out the same hard measure 
on all his hearers," as Mr. EL has asserted, still 
the same occasion which directed him to rectify 
the mistake respecting himself, must have directed 
him to rectify it respecting others whom he had 
involuntarily led into a serious error. Above all, 
it must have imperiously called upon him to detect 
the fallacy of that principle which contained the 
awful consequence; and have obliged him to 
place it in such a light, that it should be no longer 
the source of mischief. This he was bound in 
justice to do. And, admitting the statement to 
be correct which Mr. H. has given, we have the 
greater reason to expect it, since he has been so 
candid as to note those minute changes which 
took place in his views of his own experience. In- 
stead of this, the principle remains unaltered; and 



139 



is again republished with all its circumstances; aticl 
republished by a man, remarkable for a sound 
understanding, and venerable for piety. 

* How little (continues Mr. H.) are we autho 
rized to believe all the harsh conclusions made 
against themselves, by humbled and ill-informed 
penitents, since we cannot trust even John Wes- 
ley Y' (p. 31.) No one, we conceive, will be inclin- 
ed to dispute this just reflection, even if Mr. Wes- 
ley had never spoken one word on the subject. 
But when from such partial premises Mr. H. at- 
tempts to draw a general conclusion, and endea- 
vours to infer, that because we must not believe 
" all the harsh conclusions which penitents make 
against themselves/ we are, therefore, to believe 
none, I must beg leave to withhold my assent, and 
think that the sacred oracles will justify my con* 
duct. St. John, speaking of the Spirit of truth, 
sayS) " ye know him, for he dwelleth with you, 
and shall be in you." (John, xiv. 17.) And St. 
Paul assures believers, that " the kingdom of God 
is not meat and drink, but righteousness, and 
peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost." (Rom. xiv. 17.) 
Now, if those who are awakened by the Spirit of 
God, but who have no consciousness of being de- 
livered from the o:m\t y/hich occasions the burden 
that they feel, may conclude that they are in- 
grafted on Christ, and justified by his grace, what 
meaning shall we attach to the above passages ? 
To such as these, the kingdom of God, instead of 



140 



Tbeing righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy 
Ghost, mast he anguish, sorrow, and tormenting 
fear. And should it once be granted, that an ex- 
perimental knowledge of the love of God shed 
abroad in the heart (and of the divine love shed 
abroad in the heart, no knowledge can be obtain- 
ed but that which is experimental), is not ne- 
cessary to salvation, inward sorrow and outward 
reformation would constitute the essentials of re- 
ligion; and Christianity would be reduced to the 
standard of heathen morality. All beyond what 
is in general denominated moral virtue, would be 
matter of speculation, choice, or accident, w r hich 
we could be under no necessity of obtaining. Thus 
happiness and experimental religion would at one 
stroke be banished from the world. 

But " must we lop or stretch their limbs, until 
they ply to our definitions, until their tongues 
pronounce our Shibboleth ?" (p. SI.) An answer 
to this question must be dictated by the extent of 
our definitions. When these lie within the pale 
of scripture, their authors take shelter in an im- 
pregnable fortress, which human ingenuity ma} r 
assault, but must assault in vain. But when these 
definitions lie without that pale, neither public 
authority, nor antiquity, nor common consent, can 
afford them a sufficient defence, So far as Mr. 
Wesley's definition of justifying faith, and what 
Mr. H. has denominated " the damnatory clause," 
are implicated hi this question, their supporter 



141 



have nothing to fear. The question which Mr. 
H. has proposed, so far as we are concerned in its. 
solution, the apostle Paul has already answered by 
an exact anticipation : u If any man love not the 
Lord Jesus Christ, let him be anathema, marana- 
tha." (1 Cor. xvi. £3.) This passage is evidently 
more extensive than the definition, and covers 
both this and " the damnatory clauses" which. Mr. 
H. has united together. And though he had cer- 
tainly no such design, the question which he has 
proposed, if it were just, would bear much harder 
against St Paul than against ourselves. To the 
apostle, therefore, we will refer him for an addi- 
tional defence of what we have advanced. 

To feel the love of God shed abroad in our 
hearts, and to love him in return, are the great 
objects for which we contend. The definition 
reaches no farther than to declare what these ex- 
pressions evidently imply; and the scripture I 
have quoted embraces every idea. This love of 
God, and to God, we conceive to be essential to 
salvation, though it may be manifested with dif- 
ferent degrees of evidence. " We teach," as 
Mr. Benson has justly observed, "that those in 
whom the fruits of the spirit are not found, are at 
present destitute of regenerating grace, and, there- 
fore, ought to despair of being saved eternally, 
saved into heaven, without experiencing a change 
of their state and character, or without being 
made new creatures in Christ Jesus." (Inspector, 



142 



pf Methodism inspected, p. 44.) And should MiV 
H. on reading these words, be disposed to exclaim 
that this is an avowal of " the damnatory clause/* 
and " the devil-invented sin of non-assurance/' I 
have only to deny the fact in his sense of the 
terms, and would recommend him to utter his 
complaint t him who has pronounced an ana- 
thema on those who love not the Lord Jesus 
Christ. 

Anxious to make penitence more important 
than love, to prefer doubts to realized faith, and 
uncertainty to assurance, Mr. H. proceeds thus to 
arsrue against the latter : " A man's assurance or 
non- assurance, whether true or false, may have 
much influence on his personal peace and piety ; 
but I can judge of neither otherwise than by 
their fruits; a rule of judgment which I have the 
authority of our Lord to abide by. And what 
more fallacious or dangerous criteria can we resort 
to than assurance anc 1 non-assurance ?" (p. 32.) 
Perhaps, this is" the first time that ever " assur- 
ance, whether true or false," was denominated a 
16 fallacious or dangerous criterion." If " true 
assurance" may prove dangerous, (and to that 
which is not true I can annex no idea,) can cer- 
tainly be safe ? If assurance be fallacious, can 
intuitive knowledge be depended on ? Or if it 
may prove both dangerous and fallacious, can 
any thing be substituted in its stead, w r hich affords 
iQ&re indubitable evidence i Have uncertainty 



143 

and doubt a greater claim upon our confidence 
These questions can admit of but one reply ; and 
this must determine, that " assurance" never can 
be what Mr. H. has represented it. For^ though 
we allow that actions are more visible in the eyes 
of spectators, yet they can no further operate on 
the mind of him to whom they belong, than as 
they are more or less accompanied with assurance. 
On this account they can never he introduced to 
supplant assurance, or admitted in any case in 
the character of rivals to its claims. In short, if 
assurance, " whether true or false, be a fallacious 
and dangerous criterion/' as Mr. H. asserts, then 
assurance must be something diametrically oppo- 
site to what the name imports. It must be some- 
thing from which the nature of assurance is wholly 
excluded, though it retains the name : and in 
order to view it in the light in which Mr. H. has 
placed it, we must allow it to be assurance and 
not assurance at the same time, which is a pal- 
pable contradiction. And were I addressing my- 
self to the author of the passage, I should feel no 
hesitation in adopting the sentence with which he 
concludes his paragraph, and in retorting it upon 
himself to terminate mine. " If, without fear of 
offence, I may speak the real sentiments of my 
heart, I should deem myself an ideot to judge of 
my fellow-christians upon such principles." 

No assurance, we invariably assert, can be ex- 
perienced by any christian, which is contradicted 



144 



hy the actions of his life. By practical piety, the 
faith which works by love is made manifest. The 
tree and its fruits are alike made good. Still we 
contend,that the tree must first undergo the change; 
and we think we have no contemptible authority 
for our belief. (Matt. xii. 33.) The principle, we 
assert, must reign within, from whence those con- 
sequences flow which are visible to all. The for- 
mer brings peace and joy into the soul, and the 
latter convinces all observers that we have been 
with Jesus. We do not, however, imagine that 
the inward assurance for which we argue, arises 
from the observations that we make on our own 
conduct; but from that spiritual Fountain which is 
as a well of water springing up into everlasting 
life. An actual possession of this is the perma- 
nent basis on which assurance rests. And to sup- 
pose that God would permit awakened penitents, 
that earnestly desired rest, to be deceived with 
what is erroneously called a false assurance, be- 
gotten by the enemy of souls, is such a reflection 
on his moral nature, such a contemptuous view of 
his justice, goodness, mercy, and love, and such 
a distrust of all his promises, as cannot be har- 
boured by any souls that are acquainted with him. 
The instant we admit the unholy thought, we 
must conclude that God hath given them up to 
strong delusions, that they may believe a lie, and 
sink into perdition while they are in the act of 
calling upon him for mercy. 



145 



Mr. II. having thus detected the m fallacy of 
assurance," hastens fall speed to annihilate a 
distinction which Mr. Wesley has introduced 
into his writings, and introduced for reasons 
which will soon become apparent. The dis- 
tinction of which I speak is that which divides 
the servants from the children of God. These are 
terms which repeatedly occur in many portions of 
scripture, where they are evidently used with dis- 
tinct significations. This distinction, Mr. W. is 
not charged with having abandoned, as he is with 
having relinquished his definition ; but it does not 
suit Mr, Home's purpose to admit it, and hence 
it becomes a subject of controversy. Thus, such 
parts of Mr, W.*s writings as Mr. II. thinks he 
can make subservient to his own system, he retains 
and introduces with marks of veneration, especially 
wherever he conceives that they betray a derelic- 
tion of principle But in other cases, where his 
observations are diametrically opposite to these 
imaginary derelictions, Mr. H. becomes an oppo- 
nent, and exerts himself to make the stubborn 
language bow to do homage to his intentions * 

- * Though this has been the ordeal through which some 
of Mr. Wesley's expressions have been doomed to pass, it 
is far from being the case with a considerable proportion, 
or even the thousandth pari of li is works. The great 
mass of his writings is left untouched. The general tenor 
of his volumes is passed over in silence> The pointed ex- 
pressions of his Hymns have entirely ^scaped notice, jft 

H 



146 



But I now return to the distinction between a 
servant and a child of God. 

The doctrine taught by Mr. Wesley and Mr. 
Fletcher on this head, we acknowledge to be the 
same as we now embrace, and invariably inculcate. 
And without any distinction I shall, occasionally, 
appeal to the writings of either, for arguments 
which will tend to illustrate those views which we 
have of this subject, in common with one another. 
I will therefore introduce, from Mr. Fletcher, " a 
plain account of the gospel in general, and of the 
various dispensations into which it branches it- 
self." 

46 The gospel, in general, is a divine system of 
truth, which, with various degrees of evidence, 
points out to sinners the way of eternal salvation, 
agreeably to the mercy and justice of a holy 
God ; and, therefore, the gospel, in general, is an 
assemblage of hoi} 7 doctrines of grace, and gra- 
cious doctrines of justice. This is the idea which 
our Lord himself gives us of it in Mark, xvi. 16. 
For though he speaks there of the peculiar gospel 

few insulated passages alone, evidently broken from their 
connections, or detached from their causes and conse- 
quences, are either violently impressed, or cruelly tortured, 
to appear in the behalf of a sentiment which Mr. W. al- 
most with his dying breath disowned. In much the same 
manner Mr. Fletcher is drawn into this strange confederacy, 
from which, in a subsequent letter, I shall endeavour to 
rescue hiin. 



147 



dispensation which he opened, his words may, in 
gome sense, be applied to every gospel dispensation. 
Preach the gospel. — He that believeth in the light 
of his dispensation, supposing he doth it with the 
heart unto righteousness, shall be saved, accord- 
ing to the privileges of his dispensation : here you 
have a holy doctrine of grace : but he that believ- 
eth not, shall be damned : here you have a gra- 
cious doctrine of justice. For, supposing man has 
a gracious capacity to believe in the light of his 
dispensation, there is no Antinomian grace in the 
promise, and no free wrath in the threatening/ 
which compose what our Lord calls the gospel ; 
but the conditional promise exhibits a righteous 
doctrine of grace, and the conditional threatening 
displays a gracious doctrine of justice. 

" The gospel, in general, branches itself out 
into four capital dispensations ; the last of which 
is most eminently called the gospel, because it 
includes and perfects all the preceding displays of 
God's grace and justice towards man. Take we a 
view of these four dispensations, beginning at the 
lowest; viz. Gentilism. 

" I. Gentilism; which is frequently called 
natural religion, and might with propriety be 
called the gospel of the Gentiles ; — Gentilism, I 
say, is a dispensation of grace and justice, which 
St. Peter preaches and describes in these words : 
u In every nation he that feareth God and worked* 
righteousness (according to his light) is accepted 
with him these words contain an holv doctrine of 



148 



grace,which is inseparably connected with this holy 
doctrine of justice : In every nation he that feareth 
not God, and worketh not righteousness, (according 
to his light) is not accepted of him. 

" II. Judaism; which is frequently called the 
Mosaic dispensation, or the law ; that is, accord- 
ing to the first meaning of the Hebrew word 
mm, the doctrine, or the instruction, and which 
might with propriety be called the Jewish gospel; 
— Judaism, I say, is that particular display of the 
doctrine of grace and justice, which was chiefly 
calculated for the meridian of Canaan, and is con- 
tained in the Old Testament, but especially in the 
five books of Moses. The prophet Samuel sums 
it all up in these words : Only fear the Lord, and 
serve him in truth with all your hearts (according 
to the Jaw, t. e. doctrine, of Moses) ; for consider 
how great things he hath done for you (his pecu- 
liar people); but if ye shall still continue to do 
wickedh\ ye shall be consumed. 1 Sam. xii. 24, 25. 
In this gospel dispensation also, the doctrine of 
grace goes hand in hand with the doctrine of jus- 
tice. Every book in the Old Testament confirms 
the truth of this assertion. 

" III. The gospel of John the Baptist ; which 
is commonly called the Baptism of John, in con- 
nection with the gospel, or baptism which the 
apostles preached, before Christ opened the glo- 
jious baptism of his own Spirit on the day of Pen- 
tecost. This gospel dispensation, I say, is the 
Jewish gospel improved into Infant Christjl- 



U9 



A nity. Or, if you please, it is Christianity fail- 
ing short of that indwelling power from on higb, 
which is called the kingdom of God come with 
power. This gospel is chiefly found in the four 
gospels. It clearly points out the person of Chris r, 
gives us his history, holds forth his mediatorial 
law ; and, leading on to the perfection of Christi- 
anity, displays with increasing light, (i.) The 
doctrines of grace, which kindly call the chief of 
sinners to eternal salvation, through the practi- 
cable means of repentance, faith, and obedience ; 
and (2.) The doctrines of justice, which awfully 
threaten sinners with destruction, if they finally 
neglect to repent, believe, and obey, 

" The capital difference between the gospel dis- 
pensation, and the Jewish gospel, consists in this-: 
The Jewish gospel holds forth Christ about to 
come, in types and prophecies ; but this gospel 
displays the fulfilment of the Jewish prophecies, 
and, without a typical veil, points out Christ as al- 
ready come. Again : The political part of the 
Jewish gospel admits of some temporary indul- 
gences with respect to divorce, the plurality of 
wives, &c. ; which indulgences are repealed in the 
christian institution, where morality is carried to 
the greatest height, and enforced by the strongest 
motives. But, on the other hand, the ceremonial 
part of the gospel of Christ, grants us many in- 
dulgences with respect to sabbaths, festivals, 
washings, meats, places of worship, &c. For it 



150 



binds upon us only the two unbloody significant 
rites, which the scriptures call baptism and the 
Lord's supper ; freeing us from shedding human 
blood in circumcision, ^nd the blood of beasts in 
daily sacrifices: an important freedom this, which 
St. Paul calls the (ceremonial) liberty wherewith 
Christ hath made us free, and for which he so 
strenuously contends against judaizing preachers, 
who would bring his Galatian converts under thq 
bloody yoke of circumcision and Jewish bondage. 

" IV. The perfect gospel of Christ, is fre- 
quently called the gospel only, on account of 
its fulness, and because ■ it . contains whatever is 
excellent in the above-described gospel dispensa- 
tions. We may truly say, therefore, that perfect 
Christianity, or the complete gospel of Christ, is 
Gentilism, Judaism, and the baptism of John, ar- 
rived at their full maturity. This perfected gospel 
is found then initially in the four books which 
bear the name of gospel, and perfectively in the 
Acts of the. Apostles and the Epistles. The dif- 
ference between this perfected erosrjel, and the 
gospel which was preached before the day of Pen- 
tecost, consists in this capital article : Before that 
clay, our Lord, and his forerunner John the Bap- 
tist, foretold, that Christ should baptize with the 
Holy Ghost ; and Christ promised the indwelling 
Spirit. He said, he dwelleth with you, and shall 
(then) be in you— Ye shall be baptized with the 
Holy Ghost not many days hence. But the full 



151 



gospel of Christ takes in the full dispensation of 
Christ's Spirit, as well as the full history of Christ's 
life, death, and resurrection ; comprehending the 
glad news of the descent of the Holy Ghost, as 
well as the joyful tidings of the ascension of the 
Son : and, therefore, its distinguishing character 
is thus laid down by St. Peter : Jesus, being by 
the right hand of God exalted, and having re- 
ceived of the Father the promise of the Holy 
Ghost, he hath shed forth this which ye now see 
and hear. The promise is unto you that repent 
and believe. We are his witnesses of these things, 
and so is also the Holy Ghost, whom God (since 
the day of Pentecost) hath given to them that 
obey him : for, before Christ's ascension, the Evan* 
gelists could say, The Holy Ghost is not yet given 
(in its christian fulness), because Christ is not yet 
GLojtiFiEin Compare Acts, ii. S3, &c. with Acts, 
v. 32. and John, vii. 39. 

u This gospel is the richest display of divine 
grace, and justice, which takes place among men 
in the present state of things. For Christ's sake 
the Holy Ghost is given as an indwelling sancti* 
fying Comforter. Here is the highest doctrine of 
grace. He is thus given .o them that obey ; and, 
of consequence, he is refused to the disobedient*,. 
Here is the highest doctrine of justice, so far as 
the purpose of God, according to the elections of 
grace and j ustice, actually takes place in this life, 



152 



before the second coming of Christ." 

(Fletcher's Doctrines of grace and justice,. 

vol. iv, p. 4 — 8. 

Of Mr. Fletcher's views on the points before us, 
no language can bring with it clearer evidences of 
decision, than this which I have quoted from his 
pages. The dispensations are pointedly marked, 
and discriminating circumstances are introduced to 
distinguish them from one another. To the scrip- 
tures which he has collected to support his views? 
and observations, it will be needless to make any 
additions, since those produced by him are both' 
numerous and appropriate, as well as arranged 
with judic: yasness and care. In these scriptures, 
we first perceive in the Gentile dispensation the* 
primary dawning of gospel light; under the Jew- 
ish, the clouds appear more rapidly to disperse? 
under that of John the Baptist, the light shineth 
still more and more to the perfect day ; while under 
the christian dispensation we behold the Sun of 
Righteousness arisen with healing under his wings, 
shining in meridian splendour, and bringing life 
and immortality fully to light. 

With these distinctions before us, it is a neces- 
sary, but not a difficult question, to determine- 
under what dispensation do we live ? If it were 
under the Gentile or Heathen, then that faith which 
was saving to them, would be saving to us : — if 
under the Jewish, we need ask no higher degree of 



153 



justifying faith than that which the pious Jews 
had if under that of John, then by the light of 
his dispensation we might hope for mercy, and 
expect salvation:— but, if under the christian dis- 
pensation fully revealed, then it is only through 
the door which this dispensation opens, that we 
can hope to enter into the kingdom of heaven. 

Now it must be evident to all, that we are not 
under the Gentile, nor the Jewish gospel, nor that 
of John the Baptist, but under that of the chris- 
tian, fully revealed. This is so obvious, as to su- 
persede all occasion of proof; and, consequently, 
we have no more reason to expect that our salva- 
tion can be effected by the light of a dispensation 
under which we are not placed, than that we can 
be saved by that which has no existence. God, 
whose ways are according to truth, it is evident, 
never required of the Gentiles, either the faith or 
practice which he required of the Jews ; nor of the 
Jews what he expected from those who had known 
the baptism of John ; nor of the disciples of 
John, what he requires from us. For, as to sup- 
pose him to make such demands in either of these 
cases, is to make him an austere master, reaping 
where he had not sown, and gathering where he 
had not strawed, which would be a direct impeach- 
ment of his justice; even so, on the contrary, it 
must be equally absurd for any man to expect sal- 
vation by the light, and through the conditions, of 
those dispensations of grace which are acknow- 

J3 



154* 



ledged to be inferior to his own. For as a pious 
Jew must virtually despise the light of his own 
dispensation, when he expects salvation by that 
of the Gentiles, so the disciples of John must 
equally renounce the legislation of God, by ex* 
pecting to be saved through those means which 
were exclusively appointed for the Jews ; and, 
consequently, we who live under the meridian 
blaze of gospel light, cannot hope to enter the 
kingdom of glory by either of the inferior lights, 
without despising the superior displays of his 
goodness and forbearance. 

Under each of these dispensations there are cer- 
tain degrees of light imparted, which are exactly 
.suited to the people who are placed under its in- 
fluence. In the same manner, there are certain 
degrees of faith required, and of duties enjoined, 
v^hich can neither be abrogated, nor transferred 
from the people who live under one dispensation, 
to those who are placed under another. Some of 
these duties and degrees of faith Mr. Wesley has 
marked in the following passages : " Now God re- 
quired* of a heathen to believe that God is ; that 
he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him ; 
and that he is to be sought by glorifying him as 
God, by gi ving him thanks for all things, and by 
a careful practice of moral virtue, of justice, 
mercy and truth, towards their fellow- creatures, 
A Greek, a Roman, therefore, yea, a Scythian or 
Indian, was without excuse if he did not believe 



155 



thus much— the being and attributes of God, a 
future state of rewards and punishments, and the 
obligatory nature of moral virtue. For this is 
barely the faith of a heathen." 

In describing his views of what the christian 
faith is not, Mr. Wesley proceeds as follows : 
" The faith through which we are saved, in that 
sense of the word which will hereafter be explained, 
is not barely that which the apostles themselves 
had while Christ was yet upon earth ; though they 
so believed on him as to leave all and follow him ; 
although they had then the power of working 
miracles, of healing all manner of sickness, and 
all manner of disease; yea, they had then power 
and authority over devils ; and, what is beyond all 
this, were sent by their Master to preach the 
kingdom of God. 

"What faith is it then, through which we are 
saved ? It may be answered, first, in general, it is a 
faith in Christ; Christ, and God through Christ, 
are the proper object of it. Herein, therefore, it is 
sufficiently, absolutely distinguished from the faith 
either of ancient or modern heathens. And from 
the faith of a devil it is fully distinguished by this : 
It is not barely a speculative, rational thing, a 
cold lifeless assent, a train of ideas in the head ; 
but also a disposition of the heart. For thus saith 
the scripture, " With the heart man believeth unto 
righteousness." And, " If thou shalt confess with 
thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe with 



•thy heart that God hath raised him from the dead, 
thou shah be saved. 

" And herein does it differ from that faith 
Which the apostles themselves had while our 
Lord was on earth, that it acknowledges the 
necessity and merit of his death, and the power 
of his resurrection. It acknowledges his death 
as the only sufficient means of redeeming man 
from death eternal, and his resurrection as the 
restoration of us all to life and immortality; 
inasmuch as he was delivered for our offences, and 
raised again for our justification. Christian faith 
is then, not only an assent to the whole Gospel 
of Christ, but also a full reliance on the blood of 
Christ, a trust in the merits of his life, death, and 
resurrection; a recumbency upon him as our 
atonement and our life ; as given for us, and living 
in us. It is a sure confidence which a man hath 
in God, that through the merits of Christ, his 
sins are forgiven, and he reconciled to the favour 
of God ; ?*d i^ conseq uc;^ hereof, a closing with 
him, and cleaving to him, as our wisdom, righte- 
ousness, sanctification, and redemption ; or, in one 
word, our salvation. *' 

"Wesley's Sermons, vol. i. 4—6. 

Such were the views of Mr. John Wesley, of 
the degrees of faith, and the diversity of duties, 
which were and are required under the various dis- 
pensations. And such also is the manner in which 
he recognises in 1769 (the date of the edition I 
quote) that very definition of christian faith which 



157 



Mr. Home has attempted to persuade us he had 
publicly and explicitly renounced in 1 747. On his 
view of the dispensations his language coincides 
with that which I have quoted from Mr. Hetcher,_ 
so far as that of a sermon and of a dissertation 
can be supposed to agree. In both cases the doc- 
trine of the dispensations is kept in sight ; the con- 
dition of those who live under each, decisively 
marked : while that of the christian dispensation, 
under which we live, is placed on an eminence, 
that its superiority may be conspicuous to all. The 
practice which this dispensation inculcates is con- 
summated in holiness, without which no man shall 
see the Lord. And the maturity of faith which it 
enjoins, is thus expressed by Mr. Wesley, in that 
very letter to his brother, in which Mr. Home 
contends that he has denied his original definition: 
( 1 .) "I allow that there is such an explicit assur- 
ance. (2.) That it is the common privilege of real 
christians. (3.) That it is the proper christian faith, 
which purineth the heart, and overcometh the 
world." 

But while these dispensations are admitted to be 
distinct, they are not supposed by us to be at 
variance with, or even independent one of another. 
Their dependence indeed is not mutual and reci- 
procal, but progressive and inclusive. The less can- 
not comprehend the greater, but the greater inva- 
riably comprehends the less. It would be absurd to 
suppose, that the dispensation of the Gentiles 
should include that of the Jews, which is ackrtaw* 



15S 



ledged to be superior ; or that of John should b<? 
included in that of the Jews, for the same reason. 
And the same truth will appear still more conspi- 
cuously, if we apply the observations to the dispen- 
sation under which we live. Indeed, few things 
can be more irrational, than to suppose that the 
light of a superior dispensation can be included in 
one that is acknowledged to be its inferior both in 
brilliancy and extension. 

On the opposite side, however, the case stands 
exactly reversed. The inhabitants under every 
dispensation, are called on to embrace, by faith, a 
certain portion of divine truth. Now the truths 
which were riven to the Gentiles under their dis- 

o 

pensation, are included in that under which the 
Jews were placed. For it would be ridiculous to 
imagine that these were called on to u fear the 
Lord, and serve him in truth with all their heart," 
and yet discharged from an obligation to " believe 
in his existence, and that he is a rewarder of them 
that diligently seek him." And in like manner, it 
would be preposterous to think that the disciples 
of John the Baptist were commanded to " repent^ 
and believe that the kingdom of heaven was at 
hand," or that John should " preach the baptism 
of repentance for the remission of sins," (Luke, 
iii. 5.) and not inculcate what was essential to 
both of the inferior dispensations. And, if from 
hence we advance to the christian dispensation 
fully revealed, under which we have the happiness 



159 



to live, what can be more absurd than to suppose 
that our faitli does not include all the essentials 
which were taught under the dispensations of 
John, of die Jews, and of the Gentiles or Hea- 
thens ? What article as christians can we dismiss 
from our creed ? I know of none. If we admit 
the being of a God, we recognise the faith of hea- 
thens. If s we allow the promises of a Messiah, 
and our duty to fear the Lord and serve him, we 
recognise the faith of Jews. And if we grant 
v repentance for the remission of sins to form a 
necessary part of our creed, we recognise the 
faith which John taught his disciples. And we 
cannot dispense with any one of these articles 
under the christian dispensation : the whole must 
be included, and, therefore, inculcated in our faith 
and practice. 

These dispensations may be compared to " orbs 
in orbs inclosed/' or, more familiarly, to four cir- 
cles, where the greater always circumscribes the 
less. Thus the Gentile dispensation is included in 
the Jewish, both are included in that of John ; 
and all three are swallowed up or included in the 
christian dispensation, fully revealed, under which 
we live. Thus every individual, under his proper 
dispensation, has his degree of saving light im- 
parted, and, by attending to it, may be made wise 
unto salvation. 

Now, it is apparent, from wdiat has been said, 
that as the christian dispensation is the most ex- 



160 



tensive, and exceeds all the others in splendour,— 
in order to receive Christ in us, the hope, of glory> 
we must believe all the essential truths of the 
inferior dispensations ; because these are included 
in Christianity. Hence it is evident, that we must 
pass through various gradations of experimental 
knowledge, namelv, through those of the inferior 
dispensations, before we can fully reach the chris- 
tian. And, consequently; we must, during this 
spiritual progress, be entitled to an appellation 
somewhat distinct from that of children of God, 
and from that of unbelievers in the strictest sense 
of the word. What name then shall be given to 
those persons, who, living under the christian 
dispensation, and in order to obtain the blessings 
which it promises to those who embrace Christ, 
are now travelling throusrh the inferior lights? Un- 
believers, in the strictest sense of the word, they 
are not, because they have, what under the in- 
ferior dispensations would have been saving faith. 
Justified believers they are not, because, according 
to the case given, they are only now coming to 
Christ ; but are neither engrafted on him, nor 
possessed of that christian faith which is imputed 
for righteousness. And, consequently, if in this 
state an appellation must be given to them, it must 
be one which designates a middle character. Mr. 
Home informs us, (p. 33.) " that they are the chil- 
dren of God, and that repentance and regenera- 
tion are the game/' On this, I must observe— If 



101 



they are children, then heirs, heirs of God, and 
joint-heirs with Christ; (Rom. viii. 17.) and, con- 
sequently, they must be saved by the light of a 
dispensation under which they are not placed. 
Hence, then, they are virtually invited to sit down 
where they are, and taught to believe that they 
are already in the possession of the glorious prize, 
though they are only now coming to Christ for 
pardon. 

To avoid a consequence so pernicious and ab- 
surd, Mr.. Wesley denominated such characters 
the servants, not the sons or children of God. 
Their peculiarity of character arises from the dif- 
ferent dispensations of the gospel, which I have 
already stated ; and the only question which now 
appears is,— Has Mr. W. any thing more than 
mere fancy to support him in his use of the appel- 
lation of servants, which he has given ? 

Our blessed Lord, when conversing with his 
disciples, and giving to them his last charge before 
his crucifixion, addresses them as follows : "Hence- 
forth I call you not servants, for the servant know- 
eth not what his Lord doeth : but I have called 
you friends ; for all things that I have heard of my 
Father, I have made known unto you." (John, xv. 
15,) In this passage, it is evident, not only that 
the term is used, but that it stands contrasted with 
that of friends ; and also, that the words apply to 
two distinct characters, though sustained at dij> 
ferexrt times by the same individuals, " Henceforth 



162 



I call you not servants." Is not this a plain inti- 
mation that in days past he had thus denominated 
them? And as all his words are according ta 
truth, is not this a plain acknowledgement that 
they were entitled to that appellation in relation 
to this brighter display of his more glorious dis- 
pensation ? And is not the reason assigned, why 
they were henceforth to be called friends — namely, 
because the servant knoweth not what his Lord 
doeth ? The increasing light is that upon which 
the change of character is founded — " all things 
that I have heard of my Father, I have made 
known unto you." Thus the self- same individual 
'were first servants, and then friends, according to 
their advance in that light which shone upon the 
respective dispensations under which they were 
placed. 

But against these distinctions between a servant 
and a child of God, Mr. Home has a tremendous 
battery in reserve, which he thus opens in triumph : 
** But let us come to consider what is the mean- 
ing of this distinction ? Does it mean to say, 
God's servants are in very deed not his children ? 
Bidiculous. God never had a servant in his house, 
who was not his child. Will the devil's children 
serve God? Is the God who is a Spirit, to be 
worshipped acceptably otherwise than in spirit 
and truth ? Can the old nature serve the purposes 
of a new and spiritual life? If Jesus was the 
first who made use of the figure of regeneration^ 



» 



163 

was lie the first who taught that repentance whicli 
is couched under it? Repentance is regeneration, 
and regeneration repentance ; and to damn true 
penitents, is to damn those who are bom of the 
Spirit" (p. 32, 33.) 

The primary point in this extraordinary passage, 
is comprised in these words — " Does the distinc- 
tion mean to say, that God's servants are, in veiy 
deed, not his children? Ridiculous. God never 
had a servant in his house who was not his child.' 
To the interrogatory part of this proposition, Mr. 
H. has made no exceptions, and certainly we have 
no right to make them for him. But we have an 
undoubted right, not only to prove that what he 
has denominated " ridiculous,'' is true, but that 
his next assertion, when taken in the abstract, is 
demonstrably false. In the prophecy of Jeremiah, 
chap. xxv. 9- Nebuchadnezzar is expressly called 
the " Servant of God!' And yet, notwithstand- 
ing this distinguishing appellation, no one, I con- 
ceive, not even Mr. H. himself, who has made the 
assertion, will presume to say that Nebuchadnez- 
zar was a child of God. Similar observations 
might be made on the characters of a Shepherd," 
(Isa. xliv. £3.), and " Anointed," (Isa. xlv. !.)> 
which are given to Cyrus. For, though few 
princes, whose names are enrolled on the records 
of antiquity, have left behind them a more ex- 
alted character ; yet, whoever notices the manner 
in which he is introduced by the prophet, must 



164 



flcknowledge, that it was from his subserviency to 
the divine designs, and not from his personal piety, 
that the epithets of " Shepherd/' and " Anointed," 
Were bestowed upon him. What were the Assy- 
rians ? — What were all those nations that harassed 
the Israelites in the early periods of their history ? 
—What was Titus Vespasian, by whom Jerusa* 
lem was sacked ? — -And what are all " those mighty 
troublers of the earth, who swim to sovereign rule 
through seas of blood ?" — All are servants of the 
living God. But, alas ! few among them, we 
have reason to fear, are his genuine children. In- 
animate nature serves the divine purposes, and 
every instrument through which he acts is a ser- 
vant of the living God. Kay, even Satan him* 
self, who, at this moment, is doomed to " do hi$ 
errands in the gloomy deep," is the servant of 
his justice, and the subject of his power. And 
yet Mr. H. in direct opposition to fact, to reason, 
and to scripture authority, declares it to be ridi 
culous, that any one should be the servant, with* 
out being the child of God ! But let us now con* 
sider this assertion in a spiritual light. 

That no one can be a servant without being a 
child of God, under the christian dispensation, 
provided the motives of action with both charac- 
ters be equally good, I most readily admit. And 
that either Mr. W. or ourselves have asserted 
the contrary, under the circumstances given, is a 
piece of information which I have yet to leara* 



it**** 
oo 

We, nevertheless, contend, that those who live k\ 
the light of the christian dispensation, and yet 
go no further than to comply with the conditions 
of the Gentile or Jewish dispensations, have not 
that faith which is peculiar to the christian, and, 
consequently, cannot, as such, be denominated the 
children of God. And yet, in relation to this 
christian dispensation, since they have evidently 
taken some steps towards the obtaining of that 
degree of faith which is peculiar to it, they can- 
not be considered as wholly in the gall of bitter- 
ness, and in the bonds of iniquity. For since 
they have broken off their shis by repentance — 
have ceased to do evil, and learned to do well in 
a certain degree, — and are earnestly seeking 
after God, they cannot -be justly ranked with 
those who are dead in trespasses and sins. They 
are already convinced of sin, and have what to 3 
Heathen or a Jew, or perhaps to a disciple of 
John, would be saving faith ; but they have not 
that faith which is peculiar to the christian dis- 
pensation, under which they live, and which is 
now revealed in all its fullness. It is to these 
characters that we apply the appellation of servants \ 
and it is incumbent on Mr. Home to prove that 
we are governed by fancy, and that we contend 
for error in so doing. 

But " will the devil's children serve God r" Let 
the wicked prophet Balaam and the traitor Judas 
answer this question. Both were evidently servants 



ft 



166 



of God, and both were as undeniably children of 
the devil. Whoever performs what God has 
commanded, serves him ; and consequently, who- 
ever serves him is his servant. But it will not 
from thence follow, that all who thus serve and 
obey him are in reality his children. It is not 
the act of obedience, but the principle from 
whence it arises, that constitutes the difference 
between the servants and the children of God. 
Jn the formation of the latter character, love 
must predominate, and be the spring of action ; 
but in the formation of the former, though various 
motives may inspire to action, love never can be 
the ruling principle. That it is possible for men 
to serve God from improper motives, and on this 
account to render their services unacceptable in 
his sight, the articles of the established church 
more than acknowledge. The twelfth and thirteenth 
articles not only state the fact, but assign impor- 
tant reasons why this fact must be. The question, 
therefore, though it puts on an imposing aspect, 
is nothing better than mere bravado, which is, 
better calculated to prohibit than to meet inquiry, 
Thus much is clear ? the peculiar situation which 
I have been describing, must be allowed to exist ; 
for the wild supposition of Mr. H. that " re- 
pentance and regeneration are the same," I have 
already refuted in the preceding letter. And if 
the fact be recognised, the appellation which is' 
evidently scriptural, and used in the sacred writ* 



167 



ings in a way which sanctions the manner in 
which Mr. W. has applied it, will not, I conceive, 
fee exposed to much opposition from those who 
primarily inquire after truth. And, perhaps, Mr. 
H. on a deliberate reflection, may find it not so 
easy to abolish the distinction, as to pronounce 
it " ridiculous." 

Mr. H. in the question which immediately 
follows the preceding, with a peculiar dexterity, 
entirely changes the ground on which the former 
stood, and asks — " Is the God who is a spirit, to 
£>e worshipped acceptably otherwise than in spirit 
and truth ?" The inquiry is now no longer about 
the distinction between servant and child, but 
about that worship which is acceptable to God. 
I most readily concur with Mr. H. that none can 
worship God acceptably, but those who worship 
him in spirit and in truth. Hence those whom we 
acknowledge as servants, we conclude do not 
worship him acceptably, according to the chris- 
tian dispensation, because they have not that 
spirit of power, of love, and of a sound mind, 
(£. Tim. i. 7.) which is necessary to beget it ; 
but the spirit of bondage, from which they groan 
to be delivered. 

That it is possible for believers, who are far ad- 
vanced in the divine life, to receive the spirit 
of adoption, Mr. H. admits ; but he places the 
blessing at an awful distance, and describes it 
in such a peculiar manner, as more than intimates 



168 



that none "but adult christians can presume ta 
reach it. " But God, who sent forth his Son, in 
the fulness or maturity of time, for the glory of 
his only begotten, as well as for the per- 
fecting of his children, gave brighter and more 
explicit views to christians, admitted them to a 
nearer, more endeared, and confidential access to 
himself ; and, as adult children, gave them a 
double portion of his Spirit. The spirit of adop- 
tion, the seal and witness of God's christian chil- 
dren, was reserved as the crown and glory of 
Christianity." (p. 33.) 

The tone of this passage, and of the para- 
graphs which follow it, bears a strong resemblance 
to the views of Dr. Hale, in his " Methodism 
Inspected." That Gentleman, amidst his curious 
lucubrations, strangely conceived that the first 
six verses of the fifth chapter to the Romans, 
were peculiarly addressed to " proficients in the 
faith, and masters in Christ," as well as. exclu- 
sively adapted to their condition ; thus making 
the church of Christ sustain a similitude to a 
free-masons' lodge. The representations before 
us are so much alike, that one answer may 
suffice for both. To show, therefore, that we are 
not at variance among ourselves, Mr. Benson's 
answer to Dr. Hale shall be mine to the observa- 
tion of Mr. Home on the present occasion. 

" You know, that according to St. John, even 
u little children," or babes in Christ, have their 



169 



sins forgiven them; that, according to St. Paul, 
" there is no condemnation to them that are in 
Christ Jesus ;" That, * through him is preached 
unto all/' without exception, " the forgiveness of 
gins," and, that " all that believe in him," with 
a faith preceded by repentance, accompanied with 
love, and followed by obedience, " are justified 
from all things :" That, according to John the 
Baptist, " he that believeth on Christ," be he who 
he may, with such a faith, w is not condemned, 
but is passed from death unto life j* and that, ac- 
cording to our Lord, even u the weary and heavy- 
laden. may come to him, and find rest;" and that, 
" whosoever cometh, he will in no wise cast 
out." 

" The truth is, as Christ, in the days of his flesh, 
conferred " remission of sins," and "the knowledge 
of salvation" thereby, on penitent sinners who 
believed in bin- 0 f all descriptions; so he com- 
missioned.' <4&d apostles, and messengers of every 
age, to preach the gospel," (or glad tidings of 
salvation,) * to every creature;" to " preach re- 
pentance and remission of sins, in his name, 
among all nations, beginning," among his mur- 
derers, " at Jerusalem." Accordingly, the com- 
mission given to Paul was in these words, u I send 
thee to open their e\ r es, and turn them from dark- 
ness to light, and from the power of Satan unto 
God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, 

i 



170 



and an inheritance among: them who are sanctified 
bv faith that is in me. 1 ' And their lan^ua^e was. 
" God hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus 
Christ, and hath committed unto us the word of 
reconciliation; to wit, that God was in Christ re- 
conciling the world unto himself, not imputing 
their trespasses unto them." Hence it is, that in 
their epistles to the churches, they addressed all 
that believed in Christ, as persons that were God's 
te adopted children, accepted in the Beloved," and 
made partakers of " redemption through Chrises 
blood, the forgiveness of their sins." 

" But how is it in this case, that the learned 
Rector has forgotten the liturgy, articles, and ho- 
milies of that very church of which he is a minis- 
ter? Does he not recollect, that they declare, 
u That if we confess our sins, God is faithful and 
just to forgive us our sins :" — a That he hath given 
power and commandment to his ministers to declare 
and pronounce to his people, being ^Lnitent," (and, 
therefore, net merely to persons far advanced in 
grace,) " the absolution and remission of th°iv sins \ 
That u he pardpoeth and absolveth all that truly 
repent," although but aw r akened lately, " and un- 
feignedly believe his holy gospel :" That the true 
and christian faith is " a sure trust and confidence 
which a man hath in God, that by the merits of 
Christ his sins are forgiven, and he reconciled to 
the favour o£ God, — whereof doth follow a loving 



17! 



fceart to obey his commandments In the 1 Tell 
article, we are told, that " Godly persons feel in 
themselves the working of the Spirit of God," are 
u justified freely," and " made the sons of God by- 
adoption." Hence, this church very properly puts 
the following words into the mouths of all her true 
members : H Lord, now lettest thou thy servant 
depart in peace, according to thy word, for mine 
eyes have seen thy salvation." Surely then, our 
Rector strangely forgot himself, when he repre- 
sented remission of sins, justification, and peace 
with God, as high tod distinguished attainments 
in the divine life, and hardly to be expected by 
awakened sinners in 'the first stage of their con- 
version from the power of Satan unto God. 

" it is a pity, but some one had prevented the 
doctor from exposing thus the imperfection of his 
acquaintance with genuine Christianity, by remind- 
ing him of the following passages : " Thou child 
(the Baptist) shalt go before the face of the Lord, 
to prepare his way, to give knowledge of salvation 
to his people by the remission of their sins." " If 
any man love not the Lord Jesus, let him be Ana- 
thema, Maranatha " * He that loveth not, know- 
eth not Gocl, for God is love." The reader wilt 
however observe, that although he thinks iustifi- 
cation, * peace with God, the love of God, &c. 

* It would, certainly, be very unjustifiable to suffer this 
Station to remain without any qualifying or disemm- 



172 



too high attainments for young converts to aspire 
to ; yet he allows, that " in particular cases of con- 
firmed holiness, especially at the approach of 
death, God may vouchsafe to grant to his faithful 
and long tried servants, some animating sense of 

nating observations, as far only as I apply it to Mr. Home . 
Nothing can be more remote from Mr. Home's system, than 
that 4 ' justification" is among the high attainments of 
christians. The language which, in the course of these 
letters, I have had an occasion to quote from his pages, 
must be a convincing proof to the contrary. The man 
who represents " repentance and regeneration as the same," 
and contends that " every true penitent is born of the 
Spirit," can never think that justification is a distant 
blessing. 

After making this acknowledgment, should it be inquired, 
— " Why I quote from Mr. Benson's pamphlet what I allow 
to be inapplicable to Mr. Home ?" the following is my re- 
ply. Though Mr. H. allows justification in an early period, 
he takes care to separate it from its internal evidences ; and 
even doubts, or more than doubts, the necessity of ascer- 
taining their existence. " Well-instructed christians (he 
observes) will have assurance; weak and ignorant chris- 
tians have it not. It is not essential to salvation, &c." 
Now, against this half-denial of experimental religion, the 
passages which I have quoted from Mr. Benson' are point- 
edly directed. They tend to establish the indissoluble 
union between justification and its inward evidences, and 
to enforce the necessity of our enjoying peace with God, 
through our Lord Jesus Christ, by having the love of God 
shed abroad in our hearts. Thus far they are as applicable 
to Mr. Home as to Dr. Hales, against whose pamphlet they 
were first written. 



173 



his approbation, to support them under thek 
change." But if \m are not to expect such a 
"blessing as " the knowledge of salvation/' (viz. 
of present salvation from the guilt and power oi 
sin, producing a lively hope of eternal salvation,) 
* by the remission of sins," except in particular 
cases of confirmed piety, or at the approach of 
death, I should be glad to know, in what sense we 
are to understand such passages of scripture as 
the following : " They that are in the flesh (car- 
nally-minded) cannot please God ; but ye are not 
in the flesh, but in the spirit, if so be the Spirit 
of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not 
the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his." u As 
many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are 
the sons of God." " Because ye are sons, God 
hath sent the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, cry- 
ing Abba, Father." Ye have not received the spirit 
of bondage unto fear, but ye have received the 
spirit of adoption : the self-same Spirit (Auto to 
Trvzupa) beareth witness with our spirit, that we 
are the children of God." " The fruit of the Spi- 
rit is love, jo}^, peace." " We know that we are 
of God, by the Spirit which he hath given us." 
" He that believeth, hath the witness in himself.'* 
H Examine yourselves whether you be in the faith , 
prove your ownselves : know ye not your ownselves 
how r that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be re- 
probates ?" " Christ in you the hope of glory. 



174 



whom we preach, warning every man, and teach- 
ing every man in all wisdom, that we may present 
every man perfect in Christ Jesus." Methinks 
all these, and such like passages of God's holy 
word, impty that we may " know that we are of 
God/' even while we see the whole world around 
us, lying in wickedness ; and that we ought not to 
conclude our state h safe, while we are without 
this knowledge." 

'Benson's " Inspector of Methodism Inspected/ 

p. 47—49. 

When these scriptures, adduced by Mr. Benson 
in the above passages, shall be found to be inap^ 
plicable to the doctrine which they are brought to 
establish, and insufficient to support it ; and when 
the arguments drawn from theft, and from other 
sources, shall appear to be inconclusive, we shall 
*iot hesitate to review the subject. But till the 
former can be made to speak a language which 
their authors never designed them to utter, and 
the latter can be deprived of meaning, we have 
little reason to fear that the evidence will appear 
defective, with those who are acquainted with the 
subject ; and, therefore, all further additions ap- 
pear at present to be superfluous. 

To interpret Mr. Wesley's words, who, when 
speaking of the eatfy periods of his experi- 
ence, was induced to use some strong expres 
sions against himself — expressions which he af- 
terward thought it prudent to soften,,— Mn% 



175 



Home proceeds as follows : * Mr. Wesley's call- 
ing himself a servant, rather than a child, means 
then, that he was a babe in Christ, whose light 
was obscured by dark clouds ; in whose temper 
servile fear as yet predominated over Jilial love : 
and who did not well understand how to repose his 
soul on the glorious atonement. And such, in fact, 
are all sincere penitents, animated by a principle 
of godly fear, who have also a weak, general, 
obscure faith in Christ, on whom, alone, they 
present to God themselves and their services/* 
(p. 34.) 

By what authority Mr. H. has denominated any 
one u a babe in Christ, in whose temper servile 
fear as yet predominates over filial love," as he has 
not informed us, he has left us at a loss to dis- 
cover. We may, however, rest assured, that it is. 
not from the authority of the Bible, nor from that 
of any thing in concert with it ; and the sanction 
which such an opinion may draw from human tes- 
timonies, though both numerous and otherwise 
respectable, can here afford little or no weight. 
That the assertion is contrary to scripture, may be 
gathered from the following consideration. Su 
John says, " I write unto you little children, be- 
cause your sins are forgiven you." (1 John, ii. 12.) 
Now, whether this forgiveness be known or not,, 
it must be allowed by all, that wherever justifica- 
tion is^ there the forgiveness of sins must take 



place, and that this forgiveness, or justification, is 
applied to babes or children. Now justification 
must be by living faith, for it would be more u ri- 
diculous" to suppose justification to be by a dead 
faith, than to suppose that an individual might be 
& servant without being a child cf God. And if 
this living faith be that by which we are justified, 
it must work by love ; for it is only by working 
thus, that its life can be manifested. The conse- 
quence then is undeniable, that wherever the for- 
giveness of sins is, faith must work by love, and 
be totally incompatible with that temper where 
" servile fear predominates over filial love." And 
hence Mr. Home's assertion is evidently erro- 
neous. 

But " can he (who is a sincere penitent) read 
the gospels, the plainest parts of scripture, and 
which, above ail other parts, flame with the glory 
of Jesus, and, not be charmed, drawn, and dis- 
posed to come to him who promises rest to the 
weary and heavy-laden ? Impossible!" (p. 34.) 
It is really curious to develop the imposing lan- 
guage, and strange " impossibility" which this 
passage holds out. Surely, Mr. H. cannot mean 
that those who are only "charmed, drawn, and 
disposed to come to Christ," are already in a state 
of justification ? This supposition is forbidden by 
his own expressions. And if these penitents are 
not in a state of justification, it will be difficult to- 



177 



know in what manner this passage is to serve the 
author's purpose, Those who are only " disposed 
to come unto him," cannot yet have received the 
Saviour by faith in their hearts ; because if they 
had, instead of oeing " disposed to come unto 
hiin," they must have already ventured on him. 
But can that person have already reached the 
haven of rest, which is promised to the weary 
and the heavy-laden, who is only " drawn" and 
disposed to come unto it?" Surely this must be 
impossible, unless it can be thought that our ar- 
rival at any given object, and our progressive 
movement towards it, are actually the same, — an 
absurdity this, which, I presume, no one will have 
the folly to assert, or the hardihood to patronize. 
If, therefore, " sincere penitents" are only ? dis- 
posed to come to Christ," a clear distinction is 
admitted by Mr. H. himself between " repentance 
and regeneration." If those are actually regene- 
rated, who are only " disposed to come to Christ," 
their coming to him must be useless, as their wanflp 
must be already supplied ; and if they be not re- 
generated, Mr. H. abandons the very doctrine for 
which he has been contending. If my soul can 
be regenerated when I am only " disposed to come 
to the Saviour," my primary inducement to come 
to him is defeated by the previous reception of 
the blessing : but if my soul be not regenerated, 
repentance and regeneration are proved to be dis- 

J 5 



178 



iincf, and the authors * charm" is fairly dis- 
solved. 

But let us grant the fact for which Mr. H. con- 
lends, namely, that genuine " penitents cannot 
possibly read the gospels without being charmed, 
drawn, and disposed to come to Christ ;"— still his 
own reasonings must turn to his own disadvantage ; 
and the consequences which result from them, will 
inevitably destroy, in another form, the hypothesis- 
which he is so solicitous to establish. If every 
penitent mourner be actually " charmed, drawn, 
and disposed to come to Christ, when he reads the 
gospels," how can he any longer languish under a 
sense of the divine displeasure ? Can a man feel 
an internal disposition of soul to come to Christ, 
and yet lament because he has it not? Can he be 

charmed" with the love of Christ, and yet sor- 
row as those without hope, because he cannot 
experience that love by which he feels himself to 
be charmed ? Every one who reads, must be satis- 
fied that the case is impossible ; and that the same 
arguments wbtbh will establish the position for 
which Mr. H. contends, if it have any meaning, 
will operate with equal force to annihilate 
his hypothesis, and confirm the certainty of that 
assurance which he " insists is not essential to 
salvation." 

" Does he not see him whom he hath pierced, and 
mourn., as a man mourneth for his first-born ? I« 



179 



Mot 'this, in effect, a conviction of the damning 
nature of disobedient unbelief ?" (p. 55.) Surely a 
" conviction of unbelief" is not faith. It bears no re- 
semblance to it whatever. But it brings with it a 
decisive evidence in favour of what Mr. H. would 
probably be sorry to see proved ; namely, that he 
who is " convinced of unbelief," must be con- 
vinced that he has not faith. " Unbelief is nothing 
but the negation of faith; and it is absolutely 
impossible that faith, and its reverse, can predomi- 
nate at the same time, or that a conviction of the 
latter must necessarily include the former. If this 
were admitted to be sound reasoning, it would be 
easy to prove upon the same principles, that who- 
soever is convinced of being poor, must inevitably 
be rich; that he who is convinced of his being 
sick, must be already cured ; and that he who is 
persuaded of his danger, must be already in a 
state of safety. If then a conviction of unbelief 
be not faith, but an indubitable evidence of its 
absence, he who is thus convinced, must be assured 
that he is destitute of faith in proportion to the 
strength of his opposite conviction. Consequently, 
while in this state of unbelief, he never can be 
justified by what he does not possess, neither can 
he enjoy peace with God through our Lord Jesus 
Christ. Thus much seems undeniable, that where 
mourning is, there peace is not ; and wdiere peace 
is ; there mourning ceases. Peace and sorrow camot 



.130 



exist together, because they are incompatible with 
each other. If, therefore, there be any with 
such characters as Mr. H. has described ; namely, 
such as believe in Christ while they are labouring 
under " a conviction of unbelief they must 
have genuine faith without peace, and possess the 
favour of God, and a sense of condemnation, at 
the same time. 

As a proof that assurance is not necessary to 
salvation, Mr. H. refers us to the case of Mr. Na- 
thaniel Gilbert, of Antigua, who " laboured all 
his life under the dark cloud of non- assurance. " 
The Methodist preacher, who stood by his death- 
bed, a pious definition-man, asked — " Brother, 
do you know vour sins forgiven r" 6 Alas! no : I 
fear it is too great a blessing to be bestowed on 
such a wretched sinner as 1/ " On what do you 
trust r" ( On Christ crucified ;' " Have you peace 
with Godr" ' Unspeakable.' " Have you no 
fear, no doubt r" ' None.' " Can you part with 
your wife and children?" ? Yes, God will be 
their strength and portion.'" (p. 37.) Had this 
pious man (Mr, Gilbert) understood, or rather 
attended to, the import of his own words, it is 
more than probable, that he would have viewed 
his condition in a veiy different light, and would 
no more have doubted of the pardon of his sins, 
than he then did of the peace which he felt in his. 
soul. What -.but insurance can destroy all doubts 



181 



and fears ? What but assurance can fill the son! 
with peace that is unspeakable? The same ideas 
which we attach to the terra, were realized by him, 
but were expressed by other words. The thing 
was acknowledged, but acknowledged by another 
name. 

From the case of Mr. Gilbert, Mr. H. returns 
again to the state of Mr. Wesley, which we have 
already surveyed, and asks — " What dreadful 
consequences will arise from your recognizing the 
infant John Wesley, as a brother in Christ? Did 
he not thrive and grow daily in grace and know- 
ledge ?" I answer, w r e know of no " dreadful 
consequences that will arise and, therefore, in- 
stead of f 4 launching our anathemas on the cursed 
heads of (such) non-assured,' , as Mr. H. unjustly 
asserts, we view him as a babe in Christ, at the 
period of his embarkation for America. We do 
not, how r ever, recognise him as a babe in Christ, 
because " servile fear predominated over filial 
love," but because it did not. Neither do we coiir 
sider him as such, because he was in " a solvable 
state," as Mr. H. asserts, p. 38., but, because his 
sins were forgiven him. We hail him as such, 
because he had faith in Christ, a faith wdiich 
worked by love, and which brought with it more 
evidence of its genuineness, than doubts of its 
illegitimacy. The clouds of rising fear compelled 
him in certain gloomy moments to cherish 



182 



doubts; but living faith, being more powerful, 
ducecl him to act in opposition to them. Servile 
fear only operated on his mind as a transient 
visitor, not as an habitual guest. Whereas faith 
working by love, instead of submitting to its in- 
fluence, dispelled the shadow, and claimed, in 
general, the greatest share in the empire of his 
mind. 

" Do yon, can yon, (Mr. H. asks,) believe, that 
the new-born babes of Methodism have all clear 
and explicit faith in Christ, and fix immediately 
on his glorious atonement ; that the spirit of 
adoption, which Jesus gave to his immediate dis- 
ciples as the seal of adult sonship, is immediately 
shed abroad in their infant hearts ; that as coheirs- 
with their Lord, they immediately drink the 
generous wine of the kingdom, and rejoice in 
hope of the glory to be revealed, with joy full of 
glory ? And to all this, do you add a direct wit- 
ness, Sec." In reply to this, I might content 
myself with the words of Mr. Wesley, which I 
have already inserted in this letter : " The general 
rule is, they who are in the favour of God know 
that they are so. But there may be some excep- 
tions." When, however, we allow that all may 
not have M this clear and explicit assurance/' Miv 
H. will only involve himself in another error, if 
he understand me to insinuate, that any can be 
justified by faith, who have no assurance at all $ 



183 



or that the 'clear and explicit witness is not, in 
general, bestowed upon justified souls, under the 
gospel dispensation. Such conclusions, I have 
already proved to be unscriptural ; and I may also 
assert, that they are not more unscriptural than false 
in fact. Thousands, and tens of thousands of 
living witnesses can attest the contrary to what 
he insinuates, and assign the happy moment when 
God spoke peace to their wounded spirits, and 
bade their broken hearts rejoice. And while 
we have both scripture and experience on our 
side, we are not solicitous about any other evi- 
dence. 

In p. 40. Mr. H. observes as follows : " The 
men, w r hom your more judicious brethren xecog- 
pise as babes in Christ, you treat as sincere yet 
damned penitents ; and with the scorpion lash of 
the damnatory clause, are they disciplined for 
months, and sometimes for years, until, under the 
humble name of penitent, they grow in know- 
ledge and grace." Whatever opprobrious epithets 
may be applied to us, we dare not recognise, as 
babes in Christ, any but those whose sins we have 
reason to believe are forgiven. If we did, we 
should contradict, 1 John, ii. 12, 13. ; and w r e have 
bo reason to believe this fact, where no exercises 
of living faith from proper motives are perceived^ 
because justification, or pardon, is by this faith* 
And w r e cannot but think that w r e should act aix 



184 



tinscriptural part, were we to assert that those 
were babes in Christ, "in whose tempers servile 
fear (habitually) predominated over filial love." _ 

As to the phrase " damned penitents," it is 
neither used by us, nor justly inferible from any 
thing we advance. It appeals to be solely of Mr. 
Home's own invention, for several reasons which 
might be assigned. Instead of intimating either 
by expression, or implication, that" penitents" are 
" damned,' 3 we view them as individuals fleeing 
from perdition to Christ, and through him strug- 
ling into God. The terms, therefore, confound 
the most opposite characteristics, according to 
what we teach. Even u the damnatory clause,'' 
as Mr. H. terms it, were we to adopt and apply it, 
as he has supposed, would not reach the present 
unscriptural combination. It would only repre- 
sent individuals to be in a state of condemnation, 
as sinners, not as penitents ; for so far as penitence 
prevails, so far have they proceeded towards the 
possession of another character. 

" A brother, G. M. once told me (Mr. H. ob- 
serves), " But we believe God will not suffer them 
[genuine mourners] to die in this state." " I ask, 
On the authority of what scriptures do you believe 
this:" (p. 41.) We answer, that our belief of 
this fact, that God will not suffer any to perish 
while earnestly seeking for mercy, is founded on 
the positive promises of God. Our Lord has said, 



185 



u Blessed are they that mourn, for they shall he 
comforted." " Blessed are they that do hunger 
and thirst after righteousness, for they shall be 
filled." Matt. v. 4—6. " Shall I bring to the 
birth, and not cause to bring forth ? shall I cause 
to bring forth, and shut the womb? saith thy 
God." Isai. lxvi. 9. * See also, Isai. lxi. I. It 
is easy to multiply passages of a similar import 
in direct opposition to that mere assertion that we 
can bring none. 

That we must receive Christ as well as venture 
on him, Mr. H. in common with ourselves admits ; 
and this, we have good authority for asserting, can 
only be by that faith which works by love. And 
the very instant this is allowed, the assurance for 
which we contend, as essential to justifying faith, 
is recognised. " A sure trust and confidence" 
is viewed by us in our definition of " justify ing, 
iaith," in opposition to a false trust and confi- 

* It is worthy of observation, that our Lord does not 
say — those who mourn are comforted ; nor that those who 
hunger and thirst after righteousness, are filled : neither 
does the prophet intimate, that those are born, whom 
God commands to come forth. In all these cases, the pro- 
mises have a future aspect, and faith is taught to look 
forward with an earnest hope of realizing the expected 
deliverance. Whereas, if " repentance and regeneration 
were the same," this mode of expression must haye been 
perfectly delusive, by holding out ideas which would have 
l>een falsified by fact* 



186' 



{fence, as well as including, a strong degree of 
evidence; but never, as necessarily implying the 
utmost height to which intellectual and experi- 
mental evidence can reach.. But this sure trust 
and confidence, whenever we receive Christ, in- 
cludes a true persuasion that we are reconciled 
to the favor of God. This persuasion cannot 
exist, unless- our sins are blotted out ; and a 
consciousness of this fact is a grand source of the 
christian's consolation, of his peace and joy. 

" I tell them (says Mr. H., speaking of pe- 
nitents) that they are not far from the king- 
dom/' (p. 45.) We invariably inculcate the same 
truth ; only we do not inform those whom we 
assert to be near the kingdom, that they have 
already entered into it. We make a distinction 
between an approach towards, and an actual pos- 
session of, a kingdom. But we make use of 
every argument, which reason and scripture can 
suggest, to urge their flight to the city of refuge, 
that they may be induced not to rest till they 
have laid hold on Christ, and by faith received 
him in their souls. Yet, while directing them 
to fly to Christ for safety, a lest they be con- 
sumed, we do not endeavour to persuade them 
that repentance and regeneration are the same 
thing," and from thence take occasion to bid 
them dismiss their fears, and no longer tremble 
for their condition. In short, we do not in- 



187 



struct them to believe that they have justifying 
faith, while a consciousness of its reverse pre- 
dominates in their hearts. Were such proceed- 
ings to mark our conduct, we should expect to 
hear our auditors exclaim, " Tell it not in Gath, 
publish it not in the streets of Askelon ; lest the 
daughters of the Philistines rejoice, lest the daugh* 
tcrs of the imcircunicised triumph 1" 2 Sam* i» 20* 

I am, 

My dear Brethren* 
Yours 

Affectionately 

And faithfully, 



T, COKE, 



LETTER IT. 



VERY DEAR BRETHREN, 

Anxious to support by authority, an hy- 
pothesis which has thus far made an ineffectual 
appeal to argument, Mr. Home, in his third letter, 
endeavours to impress Mr. Fletcher into his service. 
In those letters which have already passed in re- 
view before us, we have seen his attempts on a 
few solitary expressions of the Rev. John and 
Charles Wesley. These attempts, I hope, I have 
rendered abortive ; and in this letter, I intend to 
inquire, whether his application to the writings of 
the Vicar of Madely has been attended with 
more success. 

Confident of victory in his present design, and 
apparently willing to convince us of what he 
deems our errors, in p. 50. Mr. H. begins his 
letter as follows : " To prove that Mr. Wesley 
did abide by the letter of 1747, and that he 
did so with increasing light and conviction, I 



190 

might produce the whole of Mr. Fletcher's Essay 
on Truth ; and I beseech you, give it one fair read* 
ing, before you commit to the world your own 
honour, by impeaching me as a false witness/' 
In compliance with this request, I have attentively 
perused the whole of Mr. Fletchers Essay on 
Truth, prior to my writing of these lines; but 
the perusal has led me to a conclusion, very dif- 
ferent from that which Mr. H. seems to have in- 
tended, and from that which appears to have 
reached his mind. It would, perhaps, have been 
fortunate for him, if he had taken to himself the 
hint which he so earnestly recommends to us ; he 
would then have hesitated for a few moments, 
{C before he committed to the world his own honour 
by impeaching ours." 

In the first page of his letter, Mr. H. under- 
takes to prove, what no one among us ever 
attempted to deny; namely, that the writings of 
Mr. Fletcher were acknowledged and disseminated 
by Mr. Wesley— that they have been republished 
by Mr. Benson, and recognised by the Methodist 
Conference. These " important facts" we most 
readily admit, and shall willingly abide bv the 
consequences of this acknowledgment. The - 
edition of Mr. Fletcher's works which Mr. Home 
has quoted is now before me ; our inquirv, there- 
fore, lies within a narrow compass. Our present 
business is to examine the nature, tendency, tfe- 



191 



sign, and import of the " Essay on Truth to 
gather from the whole the intention of its author, 
&nd to mark the application which Mr. H. has 
made of the doctrines which it contains. 

Mr. Fletcher, in the title page of his fourth 
volume, which includes his " Essay on Truth, " in- 
troduces the following subjects for discussion. "L 
An historical essay, on the danger of parting faidi 
and- works. II. Salvation by the covenant of grace. 
III. A Scriptural essav on the rewardableness of 
works, according to the covenant of grace. IV. 
An Essay on Truth, or a rational vindication of the 
doctrine of salvation by faith." Under each of 
these heads, the subject proposed is kept in view, 
In the first part, the danger of parting faith and 
works is supported by many powerful and unan- 
swerable arguments. In the second, the extensive- 
ness, as well as the nature, of the covenant of grace, 

is unfolded in a masterly manner. And in the 

j 

third, the rewardableness of good works is enforced 
by such numerous scriptures and undeniable infer- 
ences drawn from, them, as are sufficient to silence ' - 
at once the specious pleas of Antinomians. In the 
fourth part, which is entitled " An Essay on Truth, 
ox Salvation by Faith," to which alone Mr. Home 
has resorted, Mr. Fletcher considers saving faith 
in its most extensive displays. He inquires how 
it operates under every dispensation in which 
the gospel has appeared, and in what manner it 



m 

leads those who diligently seek after truth, to fear 
God 5 and work righteousness, and finally obtain 
his great salvation. 

This Essay on Truth, Mr. F. has subdivided 
into distinct parts, which he has arranged under 
the following heads: " Section I. A plain defi- 
nition of saving faith, how believing is the gift of 
God, and whether it is in our power to believe, 
(p. 106.)II.Truth, cordially embraced by faith, saves 
under every dispensation of divine grace, though 
indifferent degrees. A short view of the truths 
that characterize the four grand dispensations of 
the gospel, (p. 1 12.) III. Saving faith is more parti- 
cularly described by its rise and operations, and 
distinguished from the faith of trembling devils, im- 
moral Antinomians, penitents sold under sin, and 
modish professors, who believe without frame or 
feeling, (p. 115.) IV. The reasonableness of the doc- 
trine of salvation by faith is further evinced by a 
variety of arguments. — How much we are indebt- 
ed to the Solifidians, for having firmly stood up in 
defence of faith ; how dearly they have made us 
pay for that service, when they have so enforced 
our Xlth article, which guards salvation by faith, 
as to make void the XHth, which guards morality. 
- — And why the overpowering splendor of truth is 
qualified by some shades, (p. 120.) V. Inferences, 
(p. 127.) VI. An address to baptized Heathens, 
(p. 129.) VIL An address to christianized Jews. 



193 



(p. 133.) VITI. An address to Antichristian mo* 
ralists. (p. 140.) IX. An address to a Penitent 
Mourner, (p. 144.) X. An address to- Christian 
believers, (p. 14Q.) An Appendix answering 
some objections, (p. 152.) Second Appendix., 
&c. (p. 164.)" 

To this Essay, which is thus divided into ten 
sections, to which two Appendixes are added, and 
which runs through 74 of Mr* Fletcher s pages f 
Mr, Home has repaired ; and, without referring us 
either to section, appendix, or page, culled from 
the whole about 13 pages, which appeared to suit 
his purpose. These he has inserted in his own 
book, interpolated with his own comments ; and 
then, regardless of those notes which the author 
had introduced as explanatory of his own senti- 
ments, has presented the paragraphs which he has 
thus selected from Mr. F/s works, as though they 
followed in regular succession to one another. I 
leave the reader to judge, if such conduct as this 
<?an be right. 

In addition to the above, it ou^ht to be observe 
ed, that Mr. F. no where, in the whole Essay, par., 
ticularly defines or describes what he has elsewhere 
denominated " justifying faith," which, to us, is 
imputed for righteousness. He does not even con* 
fine his observations to christian faith, in* any of 
its stages under the Christian dispensation, except 
in a transient manner ; but speaks at large of saving 
faith nk&§f its mor? enlarged definition, as apply* 

K 



1#4 

lag to mankind, under all the inferior lights ift 
which the gospel has appeared. This distinguish- 
ing truth, the titles of his sections and appendixes 
will most fully evince, in direct opposition to the 
carelessness which has guided Mr. II. in his ob- 
servations. 

Regardless of these distinctions, and these cir- 
cumstances, Mr. H. has passed over Mr. F.'s views 
of the different dispensations in total silence ; has 
broken down, or stepped over, the boundaries which 
circumscribed their respective limits, and melted 
the wdiole of Mr. F/s observations on them into 
one common mass. The paragraphs of the Essay., 
which were designed to be applied to men under 
the inferior dispensations of grace in all ages of 
the world, Mr. H. has localized, and applied to 
the Christian dispensation under which we live. 
By these means he has given us to understand, 
that it was the design of Mr. F. that those who 
live, now while life and immortality are brought 
fully to light by the gospel, should consider 
themselves as under those dispensations which he 
•had so carefully distinguished from our own. And 
from this strange misapplication of his words, Mr. 
H. has not only inferred a dereliction of our prin- 
ciples, but has imputed to Mr. F. doctrines which 
are grossly repugnant to those w r hich he embraced 
and taught. Such are some of the contrivances 
: h ; ch he has resorted, to draw the Vicar of 
Macleley into his service. I hope I shall have xe- 



course to more legal methods to procure his <lis* 
charge. 

Mr. Fletcher begins his first section thus— 
**< What is faith ? It is believing heartily. — What 
is saving faith ? I dare not say, that it is " only 
Relieving confidently, my sins are forgiven me for 
Christ's sake -;" for if I live in sin, that belief is a 
destructive conceit, and not saving faith. Neither 
3are I say, that " saving faith is only a sure trust 
•and confidence, that Christ loved me, and gave 
himself for me ~" for if I did, I should damn 
almost all mankind for 4000 years. 

" To avoid putting the black mark of damna- 
tion upon any man, that in toy nation fears God 
and works righteousness, I would chuse to say ; < 
that " saving faith is believing the saving truth, 
tf/ith the heart unto internal, and as we have 
Opportunity) unto external righteousness, according 
to our light and dispensation." (vol. iv, p. 106, 
107.) These words Mr. H. has quoted in his book, 
p. 50. and has put upon them the following com- 
ment. " Do not J. W. and J. F. decline damning 
any man, in any nation, who fears God and works 
righteousness f And do they not explicitly decline 
the definition " of a sure trust, &c, and expressly 
on account of its damnatory conclusion ?" If Mr. 
IT. had adverted to the note which Mr. F. has in- 
serted at the bottom of that very page from which 
he took the quotation, he could not but be con* 
vincecl that was acting erroneously ; and if he 



196 



had inserted it with his observations above, e very " 
reader must have perceived the misrepresentation. 
Instead of this, the note which establishes Mr. 
F/s views, in conjunction with those of Mr. W. 
in direct opposition to those of Mr. H. is entirely 
omitted by him ; and Mr. F. and Mr. W. stand 
charged with explicitly declining the definition" 
which the note recognizes. The former part of 
the note runs thus : " When the church of Eng- 
land and Mr. Wesley give us particular definitions 
of faith, it is plain that they consider it according 
to the Christian dispensation; the privileges of 
which must be principally insisted upon among 
Christians," &:c. (vol. iv. p. 106.) Will any man- 
xlare assert, when he reads this note, that its 
author had explicitly declined the definition, whicb 
it was written on purpose to avow and restrict ? 

But, even granting that the note had not been 
inserted in Mr. F.'s page, is it fair in Mr. H. 
to insinuate, that J. W. and J. F. had expli- 
cit! v declined their definition of justifying faith, 
merely, because they have admitted that it is 
not of universal application ? Do not the words 
which Mr. H. has quoted, contain a most explicit 
recognition of that very definition which they are 
charged with declining \ When Mr. F. says, " I 
dare not assert, that saving faith is only a sure 
trust and confidence, &c." nothing can be more 
evident, than that he explicitly acknowledges and 
owns, instead of explicitly declining, the definition 



* 



197 

in question. He does not, indeed, assert that the 
definition is full and complete in point of exten- 
sion, so as to embrace every dispensation. He 
admits, that in this view it is too contracted ; but 
he expressly includes it, in the more general terms 
which he uses. He does not assert, that u saving 
faith," is not a sure trust and confidence. On the 
contrary, he more than intimates, that under the 
gospel dispensation .ally revealed, it is such a trust 
and confidence ; but tells us, that saving faith, ia 
its most extensive application^ implies something 
more general. It is this; but not confined to this 
only ; for this would lead him to condemn almost 
all mankind for 4000 years. Instead of which, he 
observes> I would rather chuse to say, " that saving 
faith is believing the saving truth with the heart 
unto internal, and, as we have opportunity, unto 
external righteousness, according to our light and 
dispensation." These words, " according to our 
light and dispensation," Mr. H. has entirely omit- 
ted to notice in his comment, and has laid the 
principal stress of his interrogatories on words 
which have derived almost all their strength from 
this omission. 

But " do not J. W.'and J. F, (Mr. H. asks) 
decline damning any man, who in any nation fears 
God and works righteousness ?" I answer, most 
assuredly they do thus decline damning "any man, 
in any nation, who fears God and works righte- 
ousness, according to his light and dispensation," 



m 

And wm Mr. II. take! upon him to assert, that we 
deviate from this path of candor, benevolence, and 
"mercy? Will he presume to say, that we con- 
demn any man, in any nation, who fears God and 
works righteousness according to his light and 
dispensation ? If so, I call upon him to produce 
proof of his assertion ;— if not, 1 call upon him 
to show why he has produced this quotation from 
Mr. F. and to point out wherein we differ from 
him. 

To have combated our supposed errors fairly, 
Mr. H. should have attempted to prove, either 
thai we were under the Heathenish or Jewish dis- 
pensation ; or thai Mr. IVs endeavours to establish 
those distinctions, which I pointed out in my 
preceding letter, were fallacious. Had he suc- 
ceeded in either of these undertakings, he would,, 
at least, have constrained us to admire his inge* 
nuity, though he might not have proselyted us tcj 
his opinion. Instead of this, he has taken no 
notice whatever of the words u according to our 
light and dispensation," which are essential to the 
hypothesis for which Mr. R had been arguing; 
but has proposed his questions, on which he soli.- 
cits his readers to decide, in language which 
does not afc all recognize the existence of the 
dispensations. 

But " do they not explicitly decline the defi- 
nition of " a sure trust and confidence, &c ?** I 
answer, they decline it as a definition- of saving 



199 

faith that can be applicable to all ages and dis- 
pensations; but they do not decline it as- applying 
to those who are under the Christian dispensation. 
On the contrary, they introduce and recognize the 
definition, as I have already shewn, and shewn in 
that very passage which Mr. H. had produced to 
prove that they had renounced it. They admit 
this to be a definition of Christian saving faith • 
but justly contend, that universal saving faith is 
not " this only." Our sentiments and views concur 
with theirs. We retain the definition, but restrict 
its application to those w 7 ho are under the Christian 
dispensation; while, when speaking of faith under 
other inferior lights, we adopt the language of 
Mr. F. and say, in general terms, that it is the 
believing the saving truth with the heart unto 
righteousness, according to our light and dis- 
pensation." 

From these citations Mr. H. without once hint- 
ing that he was about to pass over four pages in to- 
tal silence, introduces us to the words of Mr. F. p. 
1 iO. as though they had followed in immediate 
succession to those which he quoted last. Mr. F. 
begins his paragraph by observing, that " the se- 
cond cause of our mistake about the impossibility 
of believing now, is the confounding w r eak with 
strong faith." But this observation, which alludes 
to the different dispensations, Mr. H. warily avoids 
and begins his paragraph with the words which 
follow ; a Had Abraham no faith in God's promise 



200 



till Isaac was bom ? Was Sarah a damnable 
unbeliever till she felt the long-expected fruit of 
her womb stir there ? Had the woman of Canaan 
no faith until our Lord granted her request, and 
cried out, 1 O woman, great is thy faith t Was 
the Centurion an infidel until Christ marvelled at 
his faith/ and declared, ' I have not found such 
great faith, no, not in Israel?' .And had the 
Apostles no faith in the promise of the Father 
until their heads were crowned with celestial 
fire?" 

(Fletcher's Works, vol. iv. p. 110.) 
On these words of Mr. F., Mr. H. observes as 
follows: 4i Of whom ask these Prophets these 
pointed questions ? Evidently of the vindicators 
of the definition and damning consequence." (p* 
5 i.) How Mr. H. could make such an assertion 
it is difficult'to say. The words which he omitted 
in the beginning of the paragraph, and those 
which immediately follow the words he has quoted, 
must have informed him otherwise. These pas- 
sages would have taught him, that neither the 
definition, nor its damning consequence, nor the 
vindicators of either, were in Mr. F.'s view. His 
design, on the contrary, was to shew, that power 
to believe was always given with the command, in 
consequence of which every plea of inability is 
cut oflf. The words of Mr, F. which precede the 
extract, I have already quoted ; and those which 
succeed it, are as follows: " Gan yau J from Gens- 



201 



sis to Revelation, find one single instance of a 
soul willing to believe, and absolutely unable to 
doitr" (p. 110.) How then can Mr. H. assert, 
that the preceding questions are " evidently asked 
of the vindicators of the definition/' &c. when 
neither the former nor the latter was a subject of 
Mr. F/s consideration ? That cause must be very 
defenceless which can derive support from such 
singular expedients. 

From hence Mr. H. proceeds to another of Mr. 
FVs sections, in the title of which the latter tells 
us, that " Truth cordially embraced by faith, 
saves under every dispensation of divine grace, 
though in different degrees." To this section, in 
which Mr. F. has given a short view of those 
truths which characterize the four grand dispen- 
sations of the gospel, as detailed in my preceding 
letter, Mr. H. has paid his court ; but, unhappily, 
in the same manner as in former instances. The 
title of the section is passed over in total silence, 
and no more attention is paid to Mr. F.'s declara- 
tion, than to the tendency and design of what he 
has written. Of the different dispensations he 
evidently loses sight, though with an eye to these, 
Mr. F. had advanced his doctrine, as is demon- 
strable from the title which his section bears. Thus, 
without adverting to these circumstances, Mr. H. 
continues his quotations from Mr. F. and places 
him before us in a light which would induce us to 
believe that he had formed the design of breaking 
/ jl 5 



202 



4own those very distinctions which he had been 
previously labouring to establish. Whereas, in 
reality, those truths which Mr. H. quotes from his 
pages, and applies to such as live under the present 
gospel dispensation, were only adopted by Mr: F. 
as being exclusively applicable to those on whom 
the glorious light had never shined. 

To illustrate his general position, which is laid 
down in the title of his section, Mr. F. in p. 1 13* 
proceeds as follows: " When God fixed the 
bounds of the habitations of mankind, he placed 
some nations in warm climates -and fruitful coun- 
tries, where the juice of the grape is plentiful. 
And to others, he assigned a barren rocky soil, 
covered with snow half of the year ; water is their 
cordial ; nor have they any more idea of their 
want of wine, than St. Peter had of his want of 
the blood of Christ, when he made the noble con- 
fession upon which the Christian church is founded. 
O! says a predestinarian geographer — " the God 
of providence has absolutely reprobated these poor 
creatures. 5 * Not so, replies an unprejudiced phi- 
losopher ; they may be as healthy, and as happy, 
over their cup of cold water, as some of our men 
of fortune over their bottles of claret. And some of 
these poor creatures, as you call them, may come 
from the east and from the west, to drink the wine 
of the kingdom of God with Abraham, when the 
children of the kingdom shall be thrust out." 

On quoting the above passage, Mr. H. remarks 



203 



as follows : " And has this passage no bearing 
on the geographers of the definition ? Do all 
drink wine in England? Have all assurance 
in Methodism, who fear God, work righteousness, 
and believe in the Son of God? &c. &c" (p. 53.) 
If Mr. H. had adverted to the words of Mr. F. 
which immediately follow the above quotation 
from his pages, and immediately precede another 
passage which Mr. H. has cited, he might have 
spared both himself and me the trouble of making 
animadversions. 

" What I have said (continues Mr. F.) of water 
and wine, may illustrate what the scriptures say of 
the truths peculiar to the gospel dispensation." (p. 
1 IS.) This short sentence, which Mr. H. has 
omitted, would have shewn him, that the above 
passage, cited from Mr. F. had " no bearing what- 
ever on the geographers of the definition/' On 
the contrary, he would have seen in this short 
sentence those dispensations which it was Mr. 
F.'s design to illustrate, and Mr. H.'s to conceal ; 
and have gathered from the whole but little occa* 
sion for triumph. The truths which Mr. H. has 
quoted from Mr. F.'s pages, we most cordially 
embrace ; and no more imagine that the same 
degree of assurance, which is now required of us, 
was required of those who lived under rue inferior 
dispensations, than that the inhabitants of the 
polar regions are outcasts from the divine protec- 
tion; because they enjoy not the advantages pf 



204 



the temperate or tropical regions. But at the 
same time, we cannot allow, that while we are 
placed in more prolific latitudes, we ought to neg- 
lect the cultivation of our soil, and content our- 
selves with such productions as the sterility of Lap- 
land would afford. 

With Mr. F. we most readily admit, that the 
light of the inferior dispensations was, and is, 
saving to all those who live under and embrace it; 
but it is incumbent on Mr. H. to shew, that the 
views of Mr. F. extended beyond this. On the 
contrary, his own language restricts his meaning, 
and secures the truths which he has advanced 
from every thing but violent misapplication. Whe- 
ther Mr. F.'s views of these dispensations of the 
gospel be right or wrong, is not the question for 
our present decision. It is sufficient in this place, 
that we can prove our doctrines to be in unison 
with his ; for with a deviation from them we stand 
charged. If, therefore, Mr. H. will take upon 
him to assert, that we are now under either the 
Heathenish, the Jewish, or any other dispensation 
than that of the Christian fully revealed, then that 
faith, and those truths which were applicable to 
those dispensations, must be applicable to us, and 
the doctrine of full Christian assurance must be 
given up. But if, on the contrary, the dispensa- 
tion under which we live be that of the Christian 
revealed in all its fulness, then the faith of this 
dispensation is required of us, and not one of the 



205 

the passages, which Mr. H. has quoted from Mr. 
F. " has any bearing on the geographers of the 
definifion." 

After passing over in silence the short sentence 
which I have quoted from Mr. F. in which he 
applies his illustrations to the various dispensations 
of the gospel, Mr. H. quotes as follows : a God 
forbid, that an Antichristian zeal for the Christian 
gospel should make me drive into the burning 
lake Christ's sheep which are big with young ; I 
mean, the sincere worshippers that wait, like 
pious Melchisedec, devout Lydia, and charitable 
Cornelius, for brighter displays of gospel grace." 
(F. p. 114.) On this partial quotation, Mr. H. 
asks, " And is this nothing to Dr. Coke, and the 
firm phalanx of the damnatory clause ? What 
were these illustrious Gentiles, in comparison to 
the babes in Christ, the Simon Peters and Johns ? 
And yet, brethren, if these have not assurance, 
yea, and the direct witness of the Spirit, they 
must smoke on Moloch's altars." (p. 53.) I answer, 
no ; this is nothing to me, nor any of my respected 
associates, in the light that Mr. H. has chosen to 
represent it. We admit the facts which Mr. F. 
has stated, and Mr. H. has quoted, and feel it to 
be our duty to defend them ; but we cannot think 
that we are under the dispensation in which Mel- 
chisedec was blessed, the heart of Lydia opened, 
or pious Cornelius was accepted of God. We are 
taught by the sacred word, that we are under that 



206 



<( brighter display of gospel grace for which they 
waited;" and are called on to exercise that faith, 
and to embrace those truths, which are peculiar 
to the dispensation of the gospel under which we 
live. 

I have said, that Mr. H. has given a partial 
quotation from Mr. F. s page. The truth is, he 
has broken oft* his words at a colon, and entirely 
suppressed the various dispensations of which Mr. 
F. was particularly speaking. Had Mr. H. conti- 
nued his quotation, he must have added these 
words : " for there are faithful souls that follow 
their light under every dispensation, concerning 
whom our Lord kindly said — ' other sheep I have, 
which are not of this Jewish and Christian fold.'* 
(p. 114.) Why this part of Mr. F.'s words is 
suppressed by Mr. H. in his citation, must be evi- 
dent to every considerate reader. 

From thus partially quoting Mr. F. from page 
114, Mr. H., without giving the least intima- 
tion of his design, or assigning a shadow of reason 
for his conduct, takes a leap to page 153 ; and ? 
without mentioning the page from which he quotes; 
introduces the following passage to the reader, as- 
though it had followed in close connection with 
the preceding extract. In this silent leap, he has 
passed over no less than 8 of Mr. Fletcher's sec- 
tions, in which that author had fully explained 
his doctrines and views, and distinctly addressed 
himself to the different characters who lived undej? 



207 



the various dispensations which he had been de- 
scribing. In thus addressing himself to " baptized 
Heathens, — to Christianized Jew's,- — to antichris- 
tian moralists, — to penitent mourners, — and to 
Christian believers," all his views and expressions 
are kept distinct. He preserves the boundaries 
of the dispensations which Mr. H. has attempted 
to break down, and writes to each character, ac- 
cording to the light which he presumed him to 
enjoy. In speaking to penitent mourners, he has, 
however, in no place told them, that they are al- 
ready converted to God, nor insinuated either that 
" repentance is regeneration," or that " assurance," 
under the christian dispensation, " is not essential 
to salvation," or that " conversion, repentance, 
and the new birth, substantially mean the same 
thing." Neither has he instructed Christian be- 
lievers, that they can be saved by the faith of 
Heathens or Jews. Instead of this, he has said, 
when addressing himself to the latter characters — 
u Ye taste those powers, happy believers, who 
see that God is love — boundless, free, redeeming, 
pardoning, comforting, sanctifying love in Jesus 
Christ." (p. 149.) Does this language reduce 
Christian believers to a level with Melchisedec, 
Lydia, and Cornelius, as Mr. H. has more than 
insinuated ? 

In p. 153. Mr. F. in order to answer some ob- 
jections to which his previous observations might 
be thought liable, speaks as follows : " Should it 



208 



be said, I puzzle people by asserting that there 
can be any other saving faith but the Christian 
faith, and any other object of saving faith than 
Christ crucified • I reply, that though Christ cru* 
cifted is the capital object of my faith, I dare not 
admit the contracted notions that the Solifidians 
have of faith ; because, if I did, I should subscribe 
to the necessary damnation of three parts of my 
fellow-sinners out of four." On these words which 
Mr. H. has quoted, he sagely makes the following 
remarks : " Reader, if thou hast eyes to see, and 
ears to hear, I ask, did J. F. and J. W. allow any 
saving faith but that of assurance ? If they did, 
do not Dr. Coke and his followers forsake them, 
when all poor non-assured souls are confidently 
pronounced in a damnable state ?" (p. 54.) 

To this question I reply, that, without all doubt, 
they allowed many degrees of faith to be saving, 
^ which did not partake of Christian assurance ; and 
allowed it to all who were not under the Christian 
dispensation; and I call upon Mr. HL to prove, 
that either myself, or my followers, (as Mr. H. is 
pleased to term my highly-respected brethren) 
have deviated from this rule. At the same time, 
however, I must contend, that they nowhere make 
this faith to include all that is essential to those 
who live under the Christian dispensation. To all 
these characters additional truths and brighter 
lights have been revealed, and, consequently, 
greater improvements are required of them. To 



209 

those who are placed under the Christian dispensa- 
tion, Christian faith is necessary; and when Mr, 
H. has shewn me, from any part of Mr. F/s wri- 
tings, that he admitted that this could exist with- 
out including any degree of assurance, or that 
the degree of faith which was saving to Melchi- 
sredec, Lydia, or Cornelius, included all that is 
essential to our salvation, I will readily admit 
that we have misunderstood his sentiments. But 
till this be done — till it can be made to appear 
that Mr. F. has actually demolished those boun- 
daries of the various dispensations, which no in- 
considerable portion of the present volume was 
writteu to fix, — and that the faith of Heathens, of 
Jews, of Moralists, of Penitent Mourners, and of 
Christian Believers, is the same ; I have a right 
to think, that our views harmonize with those of 
Mr. F., and that those passages corroborate our 
doctrines, which Mr. H. has indiscreetly quoted 
from his pages on purpose to overturn them. 

To prove that I have not misrepresented either 
Mr. F. or Mr. H. I must introduce the words of 
the former at some length, that every reader into 
whose hands these letters may fall, and who is not 
fully acquainted with Mr. Fletcher's writings, may 
see the scope, design, and tendency of his Essay 
on Truth. After having made several observations 
on the faith which is peculiar to the inferior dis- 
pensations; and instanced it in the casq of Noah* 



210 

Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, and Rahab, Mr: 
F. proceeds as follows : 

" If you say, with respect to Rahab, that 
Joshua sent the spies whom she entertained, and 
that they informed her that Joshua was a type of 
Christ crucified ; will you not render your ortho- 
doxy as ridiculous, as if you rested it upon the 
frivolous difference there is between If and If I 
Mr. B. cannot shew that the apostle ever distin- 
guished between a Jewish If and a Christian If; 
but I can quote chapter and verse, when I assert, 
that he clearly distinguishes between Jewish and 
Christian faith. For not to transcribe Heb. viii. 
and x. does he not say, Gal, iii. £3. Before faith 
(L e. before Christian faith) came, we were kept 
•under the law ; u e. under the Jewish dispensation, 
and the obscurer faith peculiar to it : Nor was this 
u damnable state 5 for St. Paul begins the next 
chapter, by telling us, that The Heir, as long as 
he is a child, differeth nothing from a servant, 
though he be Lord of all; but is under tutors and 
governors, till the time appointed of the Father. 
Even so we, when we were children (when we 
were under the Jewish dispensation), were in bon- 
dage under the elements of the world. But when 
the fulness of time was come, God sent forth his 
Son, made of a woman, made under the law, to 
redeem them that were under the law, that we 
(children differing nothing from servants) might 



211 



receive the adoption of sons ; i. e. the privileges of 
ions that are of age, and are no longer under 
tutors and governors. For after that (Christian) 
faith is come, we are no longer under a school- 
master ; for Ave are all the (emancipated) children 
of God, by faith in Christ Jesus. Gal. iii. 25. and 
26. Is it not evident, from the comparing of these 
passages, that the faith of Jews constituted them 
children of God, but such children as, in general, 
differed nothing from servants— such children a$ 
were in a state of nonage or bondage ; whereas 
christian faith (emphatically called faith), by its 
superior privileges, introduces true Christians into 
the glorious liberty of the (adult) sons of God. 

The difference between the privileges of the 
Jewish and those of the Christian faith and dis- 
pensation, is still more clearly described, 2 Cor. iii. 
There the Christian dispensation, called the minis- 
tration of the Spirit, because the promise of the 
Spirit is its greatest privilege, (See John, vii. S9.) 
is opposed to the Jewish dispensation, which the- 
Apostle calls the ministration of condemnation ; 
because it appointed no particular sacrifices for 
penitents guilty of adultery, idolatry murder, 
blasphemy, &c. and absolutely doomed them to 
die. This severe dispensation, says St. Paul, was 
glorious, though it is done away ; much more 
that which remaineth (the Christian dispensation) 
exceedeth in glory. Again, Moses put a typical 
veil over his face, that the children of Israel could 



212 



toot steadfastly look to the end ; and until this day 
the veil remaineth untaken away. But we (Chris- 
tians) all with open face, beholding, as in a glass, 
the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same 
image, from glory to gloiy. What a privilege! 
And how many nominal Christians live below it, 
yea, below the privileges of the very Heathens. 

" This, however, is the one faith of true chris- 
tians, who have the same spirit of faith ; it is one 
in its great object, God manifested in the flesh; 
one in its great promise, the promise of the Fa- 
ther, or the kingdom in the Holy Ghost; one in 
its new commandment, brotherly, universal love, 
that perfects believers in one, and makes them 
partakers of so great salvation. This is the faith 
which St. Paul calls the faith of God's elect, i. e, 
the faith of Christians, who are chosen, above 
Jewish believers, to see the glory of the Lord with 
open face, when Jewish believers see it only dark^ 
ly through a veil. This very faith he calls, inline-* 
diately after, the faith common to all Christians, 
u to Titus my own Son after the common faith,'' 
Titus, i. ] — 4. With an eye to this faith, he like- 
wise names Timothy his own son, in the faith 
which is in Christ Jesus — A faith this, wdiereby 
Timothy, who was a Jewish believer from a child, 
was made partaker of Christ, the great (?. e. the 
Christian) salvation — a faith which St. Peter calls 
like precious faith ; and St. Jude, a most holy 
faith, indirectly comparing it to the most holy 



213 



place in the temple — a faith which Christ calls nv.[ 
faith, Rev. ii. 3 3. and faith that is in me, Acts 
xxvi. 18. — a faith this, far superior to the faith of 
the noble Jewish believers at Rerea, who so can- 
didly searched the scriptures, when they had heard 
St. Paul preach-^and very far exceeding the candid 
dispositions of those sincere heathens at Corinth,, 
concerning whom our Lord said to Paul, I have 
much people in this city. If the Reader divests 
himself of prejudices, I hope that, instead of call- 
ing the doctrine of the gospel dispensation, and 
the degrees of faith belonging to it, a novel chi- 
mera, he will embrace it as a truth which leads to 
a thousand others. " 

(Fletcher's Works, vol. iv. p. 154 — 156.) 

From the preceding paragraphs, Mr. H. has 
carefully selected several extracts ; but he seems 
studiously to have avoided such passages as had 
the most unfavourable aspect on what he wished 
to establish. Mr. F. says, " I can quote chapter 
and verse, when I assert, that he (the Apostle) 
clearly distinguishes between Jewish and Chris- 
tian faith;" but these words Mr. H. passes 
over in profound silence. Mr. F. concludes the 
first paragraph thus, " Christian faith (emphati- 
cally called faith), by its superior privileges, intro- 
duces true christians into the glorious liberty of 
the adult sons of God:" but this language has 
found no place in Mr. H.'s pages. Nothing, in 
short, seems to have been so welcome to this Gen* 



214 



tleman as those sentences which appeared to ire* 
duce the standard of Christian faith to a more ac- 
comodating level, to break down all distinctions 
between the different dispensations of the gospel, 
and to render applicable to Christians in our da} r , 
those promises and terms of acceptance which 
displayed their peculiar efficacy before life and 
immortality were brought fully to light. Hence 
mutilated extracts are introduced from Mr. TVs 
work to express his entire sentiments and the 
^reader is taught to infer from this partial repre- 
sentation, that what that author had asserted on 
the faith which is peculiar to the inferior dispen- 
sations, was calculated by him for the meridian 
of the gospel, and intended to be of universal ap- 
plication. And, because we adhere, in conformity 
with his own positive declarations, to those distinc- 
tions which the preceding paragraphs express, we 
stand accused with deviating from those doctrines 
which Mr. F. taught, and which we invariably in- 
culcate. 

In commenting on the mutilated parts of Mr. 
R's words, which I have cited at length, Mr. H. 
strangely asks — " Did God, for 4000 years, give 
the Spirit of adoption to any man ? And yet was 
he worshipped only by a set of damned servants ?" 
(p. 56.) In reply to this harsh language, 1 might 
content myself with the observations I have al- 
ready made; for a repetition of the same objection 
merits nothing but a repetition of the same reply. 



215 



I will, however, observe, that whatever might hav£ 
"been the condition of those who lived during the 
4000 }^ears past, we know that the Spirit of adop- 
tion is now given, and that we live under its bless- 
ed dispensation. To argue, therefore, that be- 
cause, under a dispensation which is acknowledged 
to be superseded by one that is "brighter, the Spirit 
of adoption was not clearly revealed, we who live 
in the glorious period may be contented without 

its enlivening beams -if it be not absurd, it is, 

to use his own expression, " worse than childish/ 3 
The doctrines of the present dispensation cannofc 
influence those of another, neither can tho.se of 
another supersede the conditions of this. And 
hence those arguments which are important, and 
even conclusive, in their proper places, become in- 
applicable beyond their respective confines, and 
lose their force by being injudiciously transferred. 

In prosecuting his endeavours to guard the doc- 
trine of the dispensations, Mr. F. supposes aa 
opponent to start the following objection against 
what he had advanced : " By granting that peo- 
ple, who are under a dispensation inferior to Chris- 
tianity in its state of perfection, may have a de- 
gree of saving faith, although they have not yet 
the luminous faith of Christian believers, you damp 
the exertion of seekers, and invite them to settle, as 
most Dissenters do, in a lukewarm Laodicean state, 
short of the inward kingdom of God, which con- 
sists not only in righteousness, but in peace and 



216 



joy in the Holy Ghost." (p. 158.) « This (Mr. H, 
observes), is the very objection produced by you, 
my brethren, against Mr. F.'s doctrine ; and, if it 
could be substantiated, it would be a most serious 
one. Its bad fruit would prove its rotten princi- 
ples ; but God's truth, as it is essentially holy^ 
can produce nothing that is not so." (p. 09.) 

Unfortunately for Mr. H., the assertion which 
he has here made, is founded upon a very serious 
mistake. It is not an objection that can be justly 
urged against the doctrine of Mr. F. either by 
Methodists, or any other persons ; but it is one 
which I will urge against the doctrine of Mr. H. ; 
and if it can be substantiated, he well knows that 
it will be a very u serious one." To the doctrine of 
Mr. F. the objection cannot reach, and the subse- 
quent passages which Mr. H. has quoted from his 
pages will repel its force, or rather prove that 
it is wholly inapplicable. It is inapplicable to Mr. 
F., because he makes the Christian faith, empha- 
tically so called, to be distinct from that which be- 
longs to the inferior dispensations, and, conse- 
quently, his doctrine can never be justly accused 
of inviting seekers to settle in a lukewarm 
Laodicean state, when he makes a higher attain- 
ment than theirs essential to salvation. But 
when, on the contrary, the objection is started 
against Mr. H., who supposes that the same de] 
gree of faith which might be saving to one, might 
be saving to all, without any regard to the dis* 



217 



pahsations — who tells us, that " repentance and 
regeneration are the same thing" — that " conver- 
sion, repentance, and the new birth, substantially 
mean the same things" — who quotes from Mr. 
F/s pages the arguments which he had advanced 
in favor of those who live under the inferior dis- 
pensations, and transfers them to those who enjoy 
the meridian light of the gospel, revealed in all its 
fulness ; — it really assumes that seriousness which 
lie anticipated, and stands forth in all its force; 
Mr. H. has said, that " if this objection could foe 
substantiated, it would be a most serious 6ne. ?? 
I join issue with him in its importance, and pause 
for him to repel its application to himself, 

Apparently unconscious of writing his o\vii 
commitment, Mr. H. proceeds to adduce those 
arguments by which Mr, R has repelled .the objec- 
tion, without once reflecting that what secures 
Mr. F. can afford no protection to himself. u Mr„ 
Baxter (says Mr. F.) by a variety of strong ar- 
guments shews, that to represent assurance, or the 
kingdom of God in the Holy Ghost, as essential 
to all true faith ; and promiscuously to shut up in 
a state of damnation, all those to whom that king- 
dom is not yet come with power, is both cruel and 
\inscriptural." (p. 158.) This passage Mi*. H. has 
quoted in his book, p. 59. but in what manner it 
js to serve his purpose, some future publication 
must inform us. We most readily adopt the 
wlioksome doctrine, which the extract from Mr 

L 



IMS 



Baxter contains, and take his words in their most 
literal import. Where have we represented assur- 
ance, full Christian assurance, or joy in the Holy 
Ghost, as essential to all true faith, and promis- 
cuously shut up in a state of damnation all those 
to whom the kingdom of God is not yet come 
with power ? We concur with Mr. Baxter and 
Mr. Fletcher, in pronouncing such doctrine to be 
u both cruel and un scriptural." Almost every view 
which we take of the dispensations, contradicts the 
supposition; and the language which in these 
letters I have taken from the pages of the latter, 
and added of my own in unison with his, must 
convince every unprejudiced reader, that such a 
charge as Mr. H. brings against us, can be founded 
upon nothing but error. 

Unhappily, Mr. H. takes a strange kind of advan- 
tage of Mr. Baxter's words ; and, because he had 
asserted, that " assurance or joy in the Holy Ghost, 
was not essential to all true faith," Mr. H. has at- 
tempted to infer, that Mr. B, has affirmed that 
assurance, &c. is not essential to any true faith. 
If this mode of reasoning be admitted, it must 
follow, that whatsoever is inapplicable to all, must 
be applicable to none. This, to all intents and 
purposes, is a blending of the different dispensa- 
tions together. The purport of Mr. H/s argu- 
ment is, that because the assurance which is 
peculiar to our dispensation, was not essential to 
those who lived under another, therefore it cannot 



he iieeessaly to ours. What is there that 11133? 
Hot be proved by such a happy discovery. 

That this is Mr. H. s conclusion, is evident from 
his own words, which immediately follow, f h 
not your doctrine here asserted by J. W. and J; 
F. to be unscriptural as well as cruel? And has 
not Baxter proved it to be so, by a variety of 
Strong arguments r" (p. 59.) Most assuredly Mr. 
Baxter has proved it to be both unscriptural and 
<5ruel, to assert, that *- Christian assurance is essen- 
tial to all true feith." But how does this prove 
that these charges affect our doctrines, or that J, 
W. and J. F. concur in condemning them ? This 
is the very point which should have been esta- 
blished. But, on the contrary, Mr. II . has ad- 
duced no proof whatever; he has assumed the 
-very position which should have been supporter! 
by argument; seized opon a conclusion which he 
could not reach by induction ; and put oft his 
readers with an -unmeaning interrogatory. 

in continuing the quotation from Mr. F., Mr, 
II. proceeds as follows : " Ought we to keep from 
those who sincerely seek the kingdom of God, 
the comfort that the gospel allows them? Are 
not they that seek the Lord, commanded to re- 
joice ? And how can' they do it, if the wrath of 
God abideth on them, as it certainly does on ail 
absolute unbelievers I Did not our Lord and Si, 
Peter speak 111 a more evangelical strain, when 
they said to sincere seekers, Fear not, little flock, 
for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you 



the kingdom of grace, as well as that of glory. 
The promise of the kingdom in the Holy Ghost 
is unto you, and to your children, and to as many 
as the Lord our God shall call to believe explicitly 
in Jesus Christ." (p. 158.) 

That the characters introduced in this para- 
graph, are not considered by Mr. F. as already 
possessing that faith, which justifies under the 
dispensation of the gospel fully revealed, is evident 
from the face of the whole quotation. They are 
said to be those " who sincerely seek," and who, 
consequently, have not yet found the blessing 
they pursue. They are those " to whom it is the 
good pleasure of God, to give the kingdom of 
grace as well as of glory ;" an expression, from 
which we cannot but understand, that in their 
present state they fully enjoy neither. They are 
those to whom " the kingdom of the Holy Ghost" 
lies only in " promise," not in possession, and who 
have not yet " believed explicitly in Jesus Christ." 
In addition to these considerations, which arise 
from the face of the quotation, Mr. F. has else- 
where informed us, that, according to his views, 
the faith which is imputed for righteousness under 
the Christian dispensation, is a faith which work- 
eth by love." And hence we are compelled to 
conclude, that those characters of whom he here 
speaks, are those who have faith agreeably to the 
inferior dispensations only. 

" But are not these characters commanded to 
rejoice Certainly they are; but it would be 



221 



absurd to suppose, that y as seekers, they are called 
upon to rejoice in the possession of any blessing 
which they have not yet attained, and which 
cannot be realized, but by a more exalted faith 
than that l>y which a seeker is actuated. We well 
know, that those who mourn are pronounced 
blessed, for they shall be comforted ; and so are 
those who hunger and thirst after righteousness, 
for they shall be filled. But, as the blessing pro- 
nounced on mourners, is with an eye to their 
being comforted ; and on those who hunger and 
thirst, with an eye to their being filled ; so those 
who seek are commanded to rejoice r with an eye 
to those blessings which they shall assuredly find. 
But as mourners are not pronounced blessed simply 
as mourners, so neither are seekers simply as such 
commanded to rejoice. The blessings on which 
their joy is founded, lie in prospect in each case; 
and those who seek, have abundant reason to re- 
joice in hope of the glory of God. 

To characters like these, the doctrines we teach 
* 6 afford all the comfort which we think the gospel 
will allow." We more than " insinuate that they 
are in a salvable state." We encourage them to 
persevere; — we tell them that they are not far 
from the kingdom of God; and we point them to 
behold the Lamb of God, who taketh away the 
sin of the world. We tell them, that now is the 
accepted time, that now is the day of salvation ; 
and beseech them to harden not their hearts, as in 
the provocation in the day of temptation in the 



'222 



wilderness. We endeavour to display the amazing- 
love of Christ towards them ; we urge the exceed- 
ing great and precious promises of the gospel, and 
persuade them to put their trust in the mercy of 
God. Instead of " stupefying them with damna- 
tory clauses/' as Mr. H. lias unjustly asserted, we 
use our utmost endeavours to bind* up the broken- 
hearted, to proclaim liberty to the captive, and 
the opening of the prison to them that are bound. 
To those whose views are still more obscure and 
indistinct, we say (with Mr. F.), Fear not, little 
flock; it is your Father's good pleasure to give you 
the kingdom of grace, as well as that of glory. 
The promise of the kingdom in the Holy Ghost 
is unto you, and to your children, and to as many 
as the Lord our God shall call to believe exoli- 
•tidy in Jesus Christ. 

On the preceding paragraph from Mr. F. and 
another of a similar nature, by which he has illus- 
trated his doctrines, Mr. H. remarks as follows : 
u May I not ask, What answer do you give to 
the pertinent remarks and pointed questions of 
these two great Men? I hope you will not turn 
your back on j. W. and J. F. in contemptuous 
silence. The Essay cuts up your definition and 
consequence. It must be answered." (p. 60.) 

Language which is so explicit is at ail times 
jnanly, however erroneous the sentiment may be 
which it conveys. It leaves no room for a doubt- 
ful opinion. I t is a daring push for a decisive 
victory, risked at the hazard of defeat. The an- 



223 



swer which we give to these pertinent remarks and 
pointed questions, in general terms, is this : That 
the whole of those passages which Mr. H. has 
quoted from Mr. F. with some few solitary excep- 
tions, applies to those to whom the light of the 
gospel has not yet displayed its meridian beams — 
That of this truth Mr. H. could not have been 
wholly ignorant, because his partial extracts, the 
titles of Mr. F.'s sections, and his occasional notes, 
will all appear as evidences against him — That 
viewing the whole Essay on Truth in this light, 
we most cordially embrace it in all its parts, ^md 
occasionally inculcate every truth which it con- 
tains — That instead of repelling the force of Mr. 
F.'s pertinent remarks and pointed questions, we 
cherish tlfiem as glorious gospel realities, and view 
with regret those attempts which are made to 
lessen their energy, hy directing them to subjects 
to which they are acknowledged by their author to 
be inapplicable— That instead of turning our 
backs on the. Essay in contemptuous silence, we 
rally round it as an important standard, which, in 
subordination to the bible, we have been taught 
by experience to revere — That we consider it as 
giving us a rational account, how God can be 
just, and yet the justifier of those who believe in 
him according to the light of their dispensations, 
notwithstanding the light of the glorious gospel 
revealed in ail its fulness has not yet shined into 
their hearts. 

But " the Essay (Mr. H. asserts) cuts up your 



224 



definition and consequence." Does it indeed ? 
Then " it must be ansvrered," or the definition 
must fall. Mr. Wesley's definition of justifying 
faith, the reader will recollect, was stated in my 
first Letter. It was said to be " a sure trust and 
confidence that God hath and will forgive our 
sins/' &c. This is the definition which Mr. H. 
asserts is now cut up by Mr. Fletcher's Essay on 
Truth. I hope Mr. H. will allow Mr. F. to know 
the tendency and import of his own Essay, as well 
at least as any other man, not even excepting the 
minister of Christ Church, Macclesfield. Let us 
hear then his own words, before we decide upon 
those of Mr. Home. 

I have already observed, that Mr. F. at the 
commencement of his Essay has the following 
note : " When the church of England and Mr. 
Wesley give us particular definitions of faith, it 
is plain that they consider it according to the 
Christian dispensation ; the privileges of which 
must be principally insisted upon among christians, 
&c." This note, I again assert, must have been 
under Mr. H/s eye, when he o A uoted a passage 
from the very page in which it is inserted. This 
note,' which plainly shows that Mr. F. did not 
think his Essay would cut up the definition, as 
Mr. H. affirms, is certainly decisive as to his views 
and intentions. 

If Mr. F. had really intended to write his Essay 
on Truth to inculcate those doctrines for which 
Mr. H. pleads, for what purpose did he introduce 



225 



the above note? Was it to conceal an act of 
duplicity which he was ashamed to avow r — Was 
it to induce his readers to believe that his views 
were congenial with those of Mr. W., while in 
reality they had undergone a radical change, or 
were totally distinct ? — Were J. W. and J. F. 
partners in the imposition, holding out in the 
same moment doctrines which they were conspir- 
ing to undermine r Surely, Mr. H. has too much 
respect for the memory of Mr. F. to impute to him 
such inherent baseness. His conduct cannot be 
ascribed to ignorance. His note will prevent this 
conclusion ; and when ignorance is dismissed, no- 
thing can remain but integrity or imposition. By 
integrity he never could have been actuated, if he 
aimed at those conclusions which Mr. H. has at- 
tempted to draw from his words ; this also is for- 
bidden by the note in question. And surely the 
charge of deliberate imposition is so inconsistent 
with his established character, that his greatest 
foes would blush for their own reputation, before 
they would presume to make it. Mr. F. could 
never be guilty of an action, from which his most 
inveterate enemies would shrink. If, therefore, 
none of these conclusions can be admitted, it fol- 
lows, w r ith little less than demonstrative certainty, 
that Mr. F.'s views in writing his Essay on Truth 
were such as I have pointed out — namely, to show 
how saving faith operates under every dispensa- 
tion of divine grace. This conclusion will at once 

L 5 



226 



•vindicate his integrity and consistency. It will 
account for his frequent use of the word dispensa- 
tion throughout the whole, and also for the titles 
of his sections. It will reconcile the Essay with 
the explanatory note under consideration, intro- 
duce into his writings a general harmony, cause 
his expressions to partake of common sense, and 
repel those conclusions which Mr. H. has attempt- 
ed to force upon his pages. 

But it is not from this note alone, nor from the 
arguments which it affords, that w r e gather Mr. F/s 
design in w riting his Essay on Truth ; but from 
his own pointed, positive, and expressive declara- 
tion, in his preface to the volume in which this 
Essay is contained. His words are as follow : 

" The Essay on Truth will, I hope, reconcile 
judicious moralists to the doctrine of salvation by 
faith, and considerate Solifidians to the doctrine 
of salvation by the works of faith ; reason and 
scripture concurring to show the constant depen- 
dance of works upon faith ; and the wonderful 
agreement of the doctrine of present salvation 
by true faith, with the doctrine of eternal salva- 
tion bv £Ood w y orks. 

f I hope that I do not dissect, in my observa- 
tions upon faith, either from our church, or ap- 
proved gospel ministers. In their highest defini- 
tions of that grace, they consider it only accord- 
ing to the fulness of the christian dispensation ; 
but my subject has obliged me to consider it also 
according to the dispensations ©f John the Bap*- 



227 

list, Moses, and Noah. Believers under these 
inferior dispensations have not always assurance, 
nor is the assurance they sometimes have so bright 
as that of adult Christians. Matt. xi. 11. But, un- 
doubtedly, assurance is inseparably connected with 
the faith of the Christian dispensation, which was 
not fully opened till Christ opened his glorious 
baptism on the day of Pentecost, and till his 
spiritual kingdom was set up with power in the 
hearts of his people. Nobody, therefore, can 
truly believe, according to this dispensation, with- 
out being immediately conscious, both of the for- 
giveness of sins, and of peace and joy in the Holy 
Ghost. This is a most important truth, derided, 
indeed, by fallen churchmen, and denied by Lao- 
dicean dissenters ; but of late years gloriously 
revived by Mr. Wesley and the ministers connect- 
ed with him; a truth this which cannot be too 
strongly, and yet too warily, insisted upon in our 
lukewarm and speculative age; and as I would 
not obscure it for the world, I particularly intreat 
the reader to mind the last erratum ; without 
omitting the last but one, which guards the doc- 
trine of initial salvation by absolute free grace.'* 
Fletcher's Works, preface to vol. iv. p. 5. 
Perhaps Mr. H., with this language before his 
eyes, will hesitate before he re-asserts that the 
Essay on Truth cuts up the definition and its con- 
sequence. Mr. Fletcher's language is too plain to 
require any comment, and too definitive to admit 
of any other application than that which he lm$> 



228 



«given to it. What then are we to think, when m 
opposition to the above paragraphs, which I have 
t&ken from Mr. F.'s preface, Mr. H. makes the 
following declaration, before the tribunal of the 
public? " Now, my brethren, I appeal to you, 
and to every candid reader, whether I have not 
proved from Mr. Wesley's letter of 1747, from his 
acknowledged distinction between the saving faith 
of the servants of God, and the still more purify- 
ing faith of God's adopted sons > from his oral 
testimony to myself, and from the strong and 
pointed evidence of the Essay, that he did deny 
that a sure trust, fyc was a proper definition of 
justifying faith, and, consequently, the damnatory 
clause involved in it ?" (p. 74.) 

Will Mr. H. take upon him to assert, that he 
understood the tendency and design of the Essay 
on Truth, better than Mr. F. understood it him- 
self? If so, the world must decide upon his pene- 
tration ; if not, then the doctrine of the Essay is 
fairly rescued from his hands, and the definition is 
not merely established by implication and dubious 
inference, but is recognized by words the moss 
direct and expressive that language can afford. 
The only apology I can make, for the indiscretion 
of' Mr. H. is, that the preface had either escaped 
his notice or his recollection ; and that, wedded 
to a system which stood in need of support, he 
unhappily culled from Mr. R's Essay on Truth, a 
few paragraphs, which, viewed in a detached light, 
appeared to favor his designs : and that, without 



229 



inquiring into the Author's intention, he applied 
to those who are under the gospel dispensation 
revealed in all its fulness, the reasonings and ar- 
guments which Mr. F. had excluded from them, 
and restricted to such as lived under the inferior 
displa\ T s of grace. Mr. H. may, probably, see 
reason hereafter to conclude, if he regard his own 
reputation, that the Essay on Truth is not the 
only thing that must be answered. 

The next passage which Mr. H. takes from Mr. 
F. is brought by him to accuse us of making 
the following assertion : " That none have any 
faith, but such as have the faith of assurance, and 
that the wrath of God actually abides on all those 
who have not that faith." (p. J 59.) " This (adds 
Mr. H.) is a most serious consideration, as w r ell 
as a most notorious fact." (p. 61.) How Mr. H. 
will make this " notorious fact" to appear, that 
we allow no other faith than that of assurance, * 
I am at a loss to say. He well knows how grossly 
he has treated us, for introducing a distinction 
between the servants and the children of God — a 
distinction which cannot be supposed to exist, 
without admitting various degrees of faith accord- 
ing to the different dispensations of the gospeL 
And yet now he asserts, that it is a most notorious 
fact, that we affirm, " none can have any faith, 

* I here use the word assurance in its commonly received 
acceptation, as applying to faith under the Christian dis- 
pensation, and including its superlative degrees. 



230 



But those who have the faith of assurance." IF 
Mr. H. or any other person, will look into my 
preceding letter, he will discover as " a most 
notorious fact," that we allow with Mr. F, not 
only the dispensations which he has distinguished, 
but also the degrees of faith peculiar to them. 
With the Vicar of Madelev we" conclude, that so 
long as the accepted time and the day of salvation 
continue, all sinners, who have not yet finally har- 
dened themselves, may day and night, through 
the help and power of the general light of Christ's 
savin o- oTace, receive some savins: truth belonging, 
to the everlasting gospel, though it should be only 
this, " There is a God, who will call ns to an 
account for our sins, and who spares us that we 
may break them oft' by repentance." And their 
cordial believing .of this truth will- make way for 
their receiving the higher truths, that stand be- 
tween them and the top of the mysterious ladder 
of truth. I grant it is impossible they should leap 
at once to the middle, much less to the highest 
round of that ladder; but if the foot of it is upon 
earth, in the very nature of things, the lowest 
&tep is within their reach; and by laying hold oil 
it, they may go on from faith to faith, till they 
stand firmly, even in the Christian faith; if dis- 
tinsruishins: ^race has elected them to hear the 
Christian gospel." (vol. iv. p. 11 1.) 

We nevertheless contend, with this great Man, 
that " assriirance is inseparably connected with 
the faith of the Christian dispensation^" 8cc. (pre* 



9St 

face, f>, 5.) and with Mr.-. W. that " this w the 
proper Christian faith, which purifieth the heart 
and overcome th the world." Thus different de- 
grees of faith are admitted by us, according to 
the light of the dispensation we are under; and 
those who assert the contrary, as " a notorious 
fact," are either ignorant of what they affirm, or 
wilfully traduce our doctrines without any just 
occasion. 

Equally unfounded is Mr. H.'s observation in 
page 62, that, though " Mr. W. did teach assur- 
ance as the only justifying faith, and, consequently, 
that all who had it not were under the wrath and 
curse of God, yet he renounced it in a letter to 
his brother so early as the year 1747; and that 
the Essay on Truth proves he did so relin- 
quish it." To these assertions I reply, It was im- 
possible that Mr. W. could teach assurance, as the 
only justifying faith, while he recognised the dif- 
ferent dispensations of the gospel. And that he 
did thus recognise them, is evident from his own 
words, which follow : a We cannot measure th£ 
privileges of real Christians, by those formerly 
given to the Jews. Their ministration (or dis- 
pensation) we allow was glorious ; but ours ex- 
ceeds in glory. So that, whosoever would bring 
down the Christian dispensation to the Jewish 
standard, &c. doth greatly err, neither knowing 
the scriptures nor the power of God." (cited by 
Fletcher, vol. iv. p. 1 7(3.) It may, perhaps, be 
asserted by Mr. H. that tire dispensations were not 



232 



recognised by him, until he had renounced his 
definition; but this will by no means serve his pur- 
pose. For, without attempting to ascertain the 
date of his sermon on Christian perfection, from 
which the above passage is taken, the dispensa- 
tions are acknowledged by him in the first volume 
of his sermons. In the fourth and fifth pages of 
this volume, he speaks of the faith of Heathens, 
and of that of the Apostles. Both of these he 
characterises ; each of them he distinguishes from 
the faith of devils ; and then immediately describes 
the faith of Christians, under the gospel dispensa- 
sation fully revealed, by that very definition which 
has given Mr. H. so much offence. How then 
can Mr. H. assert, that Mr. W. did teach assurance 
as the only justifying faith? 

Secondly, it is asserted, that he did renounce 
these his early doctrines so early as the year 1747. 
* I never heard him preach either/' says Mr. H. 
i( He positively denied them to myself, a few years 
"before his death." (p. 62.) Such is this Rev. 
Gentleman's affirmation ; and yet, in the very next 
page, he produces a letter which he acknowledges 
to have been written by Mr. Wesley in 1768, in 
which his own positions are expressly contradicted 
by the words which he quotes from the letter. In 
this letter, those doctrines which Mr. W. is charged 
with having renounced in 1747, are not recognised 
by accident, but deliberately defended against at- 
tacks that are precisely similar to those which 
Mr, H. is now making on them ! 



233 



That Mr. W. did not renounce these doctrines 
in his letter of 1747, 1 have already endeavoured to 
prove in my first letter. I have there attempted to 
show, that what he had advanced in it is not irrecon- 
cileable with his definition of justifying faith under 
the gospel dispensation fully revealed, even ad- 
mitting the letter of 1747 to apply exclusively to 
this display of the grace of God. But if that letter 
be viewed with an eye to the various dispensations 
in which the Lord has manifested his mercy, every 
cloud will vanish — every shadow. will disappear. 

Thirdly, Mr. H. affirms, that " the Essay on 
Truth proves he did relinquish them." If this 
assertion be true, it must be founded on some ob- 
servations which have escaped my notice. Such 
passages as Mr. H. has quoted from this Essay, I 
have produced Mr. Fletcher's own words to prove, 
have been misapplied, so far as I have proceed- 
ed; and I have no doubt that those which yet 
remain to be considered, will be found with marks 
of violence upon them. If then it can be made 
to appear, that Mr. W. did not teach assurance as 
the only justifying faith, that he did not renounce 
his definition in his letter to his brother in 1747, 
nor relinquish his doctrine in the Essay on Truth, 
unfounded declarations may rest in peace. 

" If it is urged, (says Mr. F.) that the Spirit of 
God witnesses to all sincere seekers that they are 
in a damnable s«tate until they feel the pardoning 
love of God shed abroad in their hearts, I demand 
proof. I deny the fact, and assert, that the divine 



234 



Spirit can no more witness to an accepted mourn- 
ing Cornelius, that he is not accepted in any sense, 
than it can witness to a palpable contradiction. 
The truth is, our unbelieving fears and awakened 
hearts are apt to surmise the worst, and we are 
very apt to take these for divine impressions, 
even when we bring forth fruits worthy of repent- 
ance." (p. 161.) This passage Mr. H. has tran- 
scribed in his 63d page ; and, losing sight of the 
dispensations all together, applies the whole para- 
graph exclusively to those who now live under the 
meridian light of the gospel. Apparently uncon- 
scious of the drift and tendency of the Essay, he 
does not hesitate to assert, that this is " a point- 
blank battery opened by J. W. and J. F. against 
the definition of justifying faith and (what he 
terms) its consequence." Against it, he allows that 
a defence stands opposed in a letter written by 
Mr. Wesley to Mr. James Morgan in 17G8, but af- 
firms, that "it is absolutely irreconcileable with the 
doctrine of the Essay." That this letter is hostile 
to the light in which Mr. H. views the Essay, I 
readily acknowledge ; but that it is irreconcileable 
with the doctrine of the Essay itself, when under- 
stood as the author intended it, I shall not be satis- 
fied, till I have something more convincing than 
naked affirmations. 

The letter in question was avowedly written to 
Mr. Morgan, in reply to some observations of that 
Gentleman on the subject of the present contro- 
versy. Mr. Morgan, it appears, had adopted those 



T35 

very doctrines which Mr. H. is now attempting to 
revive; namely, that "ail penitents are in God's 
favor, or all who mourn after God are in the 
favor of God." Mr. W. objected to this doc- 
trine, because he thought it was " unscviptural 
and unsafe, 5 ' as well as contrary to what we have 
" always taught. That it is contrary (he asserts) 
to what we have always taught, Is certain, as all 
our hymns and other writings testify ; whether it 
be true or not, it is, without all question, a new 
I doctrine among the Methodists. We have always 
taught,, that a penitent mourned or was pained on 
this very account, because he felt he was not in 
the favor of God, but had the wrath of God abiding 
on him." (cited by Mr. H. p. 6o.) 

On comparing this passage with that which I 
have last quoted from the Essay, Mr. H. makes 
the following remark : " Now, brethren, must I not 
be destitute of common sense and honesty, to 
deny that Mr. Wesley asserts that the wrath of 
God abideth on sincere penitents ? If so, can 
you read the last consideration of the Essay, and 
refuse to acknowledge as men of sense and honesty, 
that he there impugns his own doctrine and yours, 
that he demands proof, denies the fact, and asserts, 
the very contrary?" (p. 65.) The design of this 
remark is, to prove that Mr. W. by admitting in 
the Essay that the divine Spirit can no more wit- 
ness to an accepted mourning Cornelius, that he 
is not accepted in any sense, than it can witness 
to a palpable contradiction and, by asserting inu 



236 

this letter that " the wrath of God abideth on sin- 
cere penitents/' has involved himself in a gros* 
contradiction. 

To make the contradiction apparent, the terms 
used in the letter and in the Essay should have 
been the same, as well as the situation of the cha- 
racters to which they are applied ; instead of this, 
there is a remarkable deficiency in both parti- 
culars. Hence the positions which Mr. H. has 
rather silently assumed than proved, wanting 
that very evidence which cannot be procur- 
ed, defeat the conclusion, and elude his grasp* 
That the language of the letter applies to those 
who live under our Christian dispensation, I admit; 
and while we ke£p in view its fulness, it expresses 
the doctrines which we teach, without requiring 
commentor elucidation. The language of the Essay, 
I have already proved, refers to those various but 
inferior dispensations in which the gospel has been 
promulgated to mankind. These dispensations 
admit of different degrees of faith, by affording 
different degrees of evidence, rising higher and 
higher, from that given unto Heathens and re- 
quired of them, to the present in which life and 
immortality are brought to light. Was Corne- 
lius, I would ask, under the same dispensation 
with ourselves? Did the gospel, which was re- 
vealed to him, require from him the same degree 
of faith that it requires of us ? Or was that which, 
was necessary to his acceptance under his dispen- 
sation., all that is necessary to our acceptance 



237 



under ours ? Analogy, as well as scripture, dic- 
tates that where much is given, there much is re- 
quired. If, therefore, the light under which we 
have the happiness to live, be superior to that 
which was afforded to others under inferior dispen- 
sations, our faith must display a more vigorous 
Exercise, and embrace objects which were not 
proposed for their belief. 

Besides, if the divine Spirit could witness to an 
accepted mourning Cornelius, that he was not ac- 
cepted in any sense, u it must bear witness to a 
falsehood ; the thing, therefore, is totally impos- 
sible. He might, however, be accepted according 
to his dispensation," without being accepted ac- 
cording to ours; and what might be terms and 
evidence of acceptance to him, may be none to 
ns. Our situations are dissimilar; our dispensa- 
tions are unlike, and our terms of acceptance can- 
not resort to one common criterion. Hence then 
we may easily perceive, how under the Christian 
dispensation a penitent might be pained on this 
verv account, because he felt he was not in the 
favor of God ; while we may as easily perceive, 
that " the divine Spirit can no more witness to 
an accepted mourning Cornelius, that he is not ac- 
cepted in any sense, than it can witness to a pal- 
pable contradiction. 

That these were the views t}f Mr. F. in the pre- 
ceding paragraphs of his Essay, may be gathered 
from his words, which almost immediately follow : 
* May we not," says he, " sufficiently guard the 



238 



Christian dispensation by constantly affirmifig^ 
(I.) That all Christian believers have now the wit- 
ness in themselves : (2.) That those who have it 
not, either never had Christian faith, which is 
^emphatically called faith in the gospel; that they 
know only the baptism of John ; or th:it ? with the 
unsettled Galatians, they are actually fallen from 
grace, L e. from the Christian dispensation, and 
now live under the law, £. e. in the darkness of the 
Jewish dispensation .; supposing they are not quite 
departed from God, by indulging in known sin : (3.) 
That if they do not press after the faith of assurance, 
they are in the utmost danger of losing their talent 
of grace, like the young man whom Jesus loved, 
•and who, nevertheless, w r ent away sorrowful, when 
he was unwilling to give up all, and follow Jesus 
without reserve ; or like those thousands of Israelites, 
whom the Lord saved out of the Land of Egypt ; 
and whom he afterwards destroyed, when they be- 
heved not the word by w hich they were to be saved 
into the land of promise." (p. 16, f.) 

What language can be more expressive of those 
doctrines which we defend, than this which Mr. R 
has here placed before us ? He tells us, that " all 
Christian believers have now the witness in them- 
selves ; that those who have it not, either never 
had Christian faith, which is emphatically called 
faith in the gospel ; that they know only the bap- 
tism of John ; or that, with the unsettled Galatians, 
they are fallen from grace. ' 

On this paragraph, which is also quoted by Mr, 



IT. he asks — "Have not J. W. and J. F. made yoir 
here.the most liberal concessions, and most strongly 
guarded the doctrine of assurance ? What more 
can you wish for ?" (p. 72.) I answer, we wish for 
nothing more ; but cannot avoid thinking, that 
Mr. H. must wish for something less. For if, a» 
Mr. F. asserts, " all Christian believers have now 
the witness in themselves, and that those who 
have it not, either never had Christian faith, or 
are actually fallen from grace/' it would be really 
amusing (if the subject were not of such vast im- 
portance) to know, upon what principle he can 
adopt the Essay, and yet boldly " affirm, not 
only that men may be in the favor of God and hot 
know it, but that, in the very nature of things, it 
must be so at one time with every child of God 
(p. 68.) and that a assurance is not essential to 
salvation." (p. 33,) 

Determined, if possible, to infer a contradic- 
tion, Mr. H. while professing to venerate the name 
of Mr. Wesley, proceeds to quote another passage 
from his letter to Mr. Morgan, and to contrast it 
with a paragraph, which he had previously taken 
from Mr. F.'s Essay on Truth, In alluding to the 
case of Cornelius, and to St. Peter's sermon, Mr. F. 
had observed as follows : a It is plain from this 
account, that no preaching was ever attended with 
a more universal blessing, and that no discourse 
was ever more instrumental in conveying to all the 
power of the faith of assurance, than that very 
sermon which the Apostle began by intimating 



240 



that his hearers were already accepted, according* 
to an inferior dispensation. Hence it is evident,, 
that the doctrine we maintain, if it is properly 
guarded, far from having a necessary tendency to 
lull people asleep, is admirably calculated to excite 
evacy penitent to faith, prayer, the improvement 
of their talent, and the perfecting of holiness." 
(p. 16 1.) In pointing out the impropriety of in- 
structing penitents to believe that they may be in 
the favor of God and not know it, Mr. W. thus 
speaks in his letter : ? It naturally tends to lull 
mourners asleep ; to make them say peace to their 
souls, where there is no peace. It directly tends 
to damp and stifle their convictions, and to en- 
courage them in sitting down contented, before 
Christ is revealed in them, and before his Spirit 
witnesses with their spirit that they are the chil- 
dren of God." (cited by Mr. H. p. 67.) 

On placing these two passages before him, Mr* 
H. addresses himself to us as follows ; " Now, 
Gentlemen, do not Mr. Wesley and Mr. Fletcher, 
point-blank deny that the doctrine of the Essay 
has any necessary tendency to lull people asleep, 
as Mr. W. here asserts ? Is not the contradiction 
palpable, and in the express terms in which Mr. 
Wesley had asserted the contrary ? Do they not 
further aftirm, the doctrine is admirably calculated 
to excite every penitent to faith, prayer, the im- 
provement of his talent, and to the perfecting of 
holiness V (p. 67.) 

On the friendship and veneration which are 



241 



thus manifested for the name of Mr. Wesley, I 
shall say nothing. But I must beg leave to ob- 
serve, that the contradiction which Mr. H. fancies 
he has discovered, is not at all palpable in my 
estimation, though it appears to be so in his. On 
the contrary, I can discover between these passages 
no small degree of harmony, which he seeing to 
have totally overlooked. 

Mr. W. in his letter asserts, that tJ*e doctrine 
for which Mr. H. contends, " naturally tends to Lull 
mourners asleep— -to stifle their convictions— and 
-to encourage them in aitting down contested be- 
Fore Christ is revealed in them/' &c. And wherein 
does the language or the doctrine of the E*say 
contradict this i Surely not in any p&&sage whieii 
Mr. II. has thus far quoted from it— not even in 
this, which is selected on purpose to confront the 
letter? This tells us, indeed, that "no preachiug 
was ever attended with a more universal blessing, 
and that no discourse was ever more instrumental 
in conveying to all the faith of assurance, than 
that very sermon which the Apostle began bv in- 
timating, that his hearers were already accepted 
according to an inferior dispensation : And that 
this doctrine, property guarded, far from having a 
necessary tendency to lull people asleep, is admira- 
bly calculated to excite every penitent to faith, 
&c. Now, the utmost that the doctrine of the 
Essay intimates, is, that penitents are accepted 
Recording to an inferior dispensation, but not ac- 

M 



242 

cording to that, the faith and terms of acceptance 
of which thev are ursred to seek. It is against the 
neglect of the latter, and not of the inferior dis- 
pensations, that Mr. W\ directs his letter; and 
nothing which bears a resemblance to what Mr. 
W. condemns, is inculcated in the Essay. Nay, 
i£ acceptance according to the inferior dispensation? 
is admitted to be dangerous, unless " properly 
guarded?' for it is only then that it is admirably 
calculated to excite every penitent to faith/* Sec. 

But how is this doctrine of " acceptance ac- 
cording 10 the inferior dispensations" to be " pro- 
perly guarded" so that it lose its tendency to lull 
people asleep ? This Mr. F. has described in the 
following words, which immediately succeed those 
that have been last quoted from his pages : " May 
we not (says Mr. F.) sufficiently guard the Chris- 
tian dispensation, by constantly affirming, that all 
Christian believers have now the witness in them- 
selves; that those who have it not, either never 
had Christian faith, or that with the unsettled 
Galatians, they are actually fallen from grace/' &c. 
(p. 161.) Here then the knot unties itself : This 
doctrine of the Essay, when delivered in an un- 
guarded manner, has a tendency to lull people 
asleep, even though spoken only in reference to 
the inferior dispensations. But, " when properly 
guarded by constant affirmations/' that all Chris- 
tian believers have now the witness in themselves; 
and that those who have it not, either never had 
Christian faith, or are actually fallen from grace ; 



243 

it k admirably adapted to excite every penitent to 
faith," &c. Here tben the doctrine af the Essay, 
and the doctrine of the letter, are in perfect har- 
mony with each other; in fact, it is the same doc- 
trine, onlv it is viewed through different mediums* 
The letter says, " we should not encourage 
peniten's, by telling them they are in the favor of 
God, though they do not know it;" and t he Essay 
*bn this point only dee-lares, thai*' the Apostle began 
by intimating that his hearers were already accept- 
ed according to an inferior dispensation? but not 
according to that which he urged them to embrace. 
Under the glorious light of the gospel, the letter 
tell? us, " we should never utter such a word in a 
congregation at the hazard of our souls ;*' (/. e. 
such a word as would lead penitents to believe 
they are accepted according to the privileges of 
the dispensation which they seek) : raid the Essay 
assures us, that to teach them u that they are ac- 
cepted according to an inferior dispensation/' is 
only likely to be beneficial when " properly 
guarded." The letter savs, that to tell penitents 
in our day, H that they are in the favor of God, 
though they do not know it, tends to lull mourners 
asleep, and make them say peace to their souls, 
where there is no peace :" while the Essay affirms, 
that " the doctrine of acceptance according to 
the inferior dispensations, will be far from having; 
any such necessary tendency, if 66 properly guard- 
ed:" and that it is to be properly guarded, by con- 
stantly affirming, that all Christian believers hare 



244 



the witness in themselves ; find that those wW 
have it not, either never had Christian faith, or 
are actually fallen from grace." 

Such are the doctrines of the letter, and such* 
the doctrines of the Essay. Where then are those 
expressions which contain the palpable contradic- 
tion ? The mountain has disappeared, and har- 
mony prevails throughout the whole. Unfortu- 
nately, Mr. H. seems to have lost sight altogether 
of the inferior dispensations, to which the Essay 
in the case before us is confined, and to have shut 
his eyes against the manner in which its doctrines 
were guarded. 

In p. 68, Mr. H. observes as follows : " I assume 
the fact as acknowledged by all, but mere sciolists 
in divinity, that conversion, repentance, and the 
new birth, substantially mean the same thing." To 
investigate minutely this strange position, would 
certainly be a waste of time ; on which account it 
shall be declined. If this position be genuine, it 
will not be difficult to prove, that our mounting a 
carriage, travelling in it, and arriving at our jour- 
ney's end, substantially mean the same thing, i. c. 
the removing of us from one place to another ; or, 
that commencement, progress, and termination, 
nre the same, because they all bear some rela- 
tion to action. A little improvement upon this 
theory would induce us to believe, that a man, 
a sheep, a butterfly, a horse, and a lobster, are 
substantially the same, because they all partake of 
animal life. 



245 



** It is (says Mr. H.) because we are begotten 
again, and born again, and grown to some matu- 
rity of knowledge, strength, and holy obedience, 
that the Father and the Son more fully reveal 
themselves to us, and give us a more constant, 
confidential, and endearing; communion or fellow- 
ship, by a full communication of the Spirit of 
adoption." (p. 68.) According to this declaration, 
it appears, that God stands at a distance from us, 
while we struggle with our spiritual enemies, and 
grapple with temptation ; and when we have ac- 
quired strength, without his additional aid, he fa- 
vors us with unnecessary assistance* To what are 
we here taught to ascribe our salvation ? Where 
are those gracious aids of God's Holy Spirit, with* 
out which we can do nothing; acceotable to God ? 
To what purpose are further communications of 
his gracious assistance made, when we have 
u grown to some maturity of knowledge, strength, 
and holy obedience," without them ? Surety, Mr. 
H. was not aware of the import of his own 
assertion. 

" What sincere penitents in your societies (Mr. 
H. asks) do not receive Jesus, and worship him ? 
Is he not even to them the fairest among ten thou- 
sands, and altogether lovely ? — The only begotten 
of the Father, full of grace and truth T (p. 69.) I 
answer, we have no evidence that any of these 
sincere penitents have received Jesus agreeably to 
the present dispensation of the gospel, who have 
not the witness in themselves, though shining witfe 



246 



but feeble lustre \ and none can have this witness- 
who labor under a genuine sense of God's displea- 
sure,, and act only from servile motives. If it be 
contended. that, though thev are in this state, they 
certainly have faith, « it must be admitted, even 
by those who agree in this matter, that the}^ can- 
not know in whom they have believed. Those, 
therefore, who do not know in whom they have 
believed, eau have no sure trust in God." A trust 
4hat is sure, is one that is firm, confident, and cer- 
tain; for these ideas are included in the term. If 
then, while in the state above described, they can 
be said to believe in Christ, it must be with a faith 
of ignorance, which is neither firm, nor confident, 
nor certain ; and few, perhaps, would presume to 
assert, that such a faith as this can justify and be 
imputed for righteousness. But if these sincere 
penitents of our Societies view Christ as the fair- 
est among ten thousands, and altogether lovely,, 
their souls cannot be wholly destitute of peace and 
joy. In this case, they can no longer be the cha- 
racters that were previously described, but persons, 
who are justified freely by grace, through the re- 
demption that is m Jesus Christ. 

u But what particular consequences, to your 
personal knowledge, (Mr. H. asks) flow from your 
doctrine ? If it be preached unguardedly, as the 
high flood of Christianity, while in fact it is but 
the neap tide of the infant river, very bad ; men 
€*o, and w ill, stop short of the Spirit of adoption ; 
and, though God's real children, will live and 



247' 



m a state comparatively dark and servile. But 
U preached as infant Christianity with clear assur- 
ance, and the adopting Spirit, rationally, scrip* 
turally, and affectionately urged, it never fails to 
"bring God's children forward." (p. 71.) This is* 
an inference which few amonq; us would have 
expected to see drawn from our doctrines, and 
which fewer still will admit to be legitimate, when 
they peruse Mr. H.'s pages. We were not aware ? 
that our doctrines were any way calculated to make 
" men stop short of the Spirit of adoption;" and 
the methods which are here pointed oat to rectify 
our errors, will hardly induce us to alter our 
opinion. But what methods must we adopt to 
avoid those consequences ? Will the telling of 
lukewarm Laodicean seekers, that their case is 
bad, that their situation is dangerous, incline 
them to sit still ? Will our telling of the earnest 
seekers, that Christ is waiting to be gracious, 
make them grow weary in well-doing? The 
conduct of Bartimeus has taught us a different 
lesson. When I see a man on the brink of a 
precipice, alive to all the honors of his situa- 
tion, must I tell him that his fears are ground- 
less, and that his state is safe, to induce him to 
find security? And will he, by listening to my 
instructions, act the reverse of what 1 teach him ? 
if this be the case, I must do evil that good 
may come, by inculcating falsehoods, that peni- 
tents may act as though I spoke the truth. In 
short, I must tell them, that " assurance is not 



248 



essential to salvation/' as the most infallible me- 
thod of urging them to attain it. 

u If Simon Peter (says Mr. H.) was a Chris- 
tian when he believed Jesus came out from God, 
loved him, and was loved of the Father, why 
are not ail Christians, to whom the Father has 
revealed the same precious faith ?" If Mr. H. 
will undertake to prove, that we are now under 
the same dispensation of grace that Saint Peter 
was, when he thus believed in Christ, I will rea- 
dily grant, that ou the same conditions we are 
constituted true believers in the Saviour. But if 
this cannot be made to appear, Mr. H. must par- 
don me., if I continue to think, with Mr. Fletcher, 
that u all Christian believers have now the witness 
in themselves," (p. ]Gl«) and that "nobody can 
truly believe, according to this dispensation, with- 
out being; immediately conscious both of the for* 
giveness of sins, and of peace and joy in the 
Holy Ghost.'' (Preface, p. 5.) 

I again subscribe myself, with great respect, 
Dear Brethren, 
Yours 

Faithfully 

And affectionately, 



T. COKE 



LETT E R V. 



VERY DEAR BRETHREN) 

Mr . Home in his fourth letter, which now 5 
presents itself for consideration, has given to his 
readers little more than a repetition of what he 
had previously advanced. Some branches of the 
hypothesis for which he had been contending, he 
here endeavours to strengthen by collateral evi- 
dence ; but, whether in his appeals to authority, or 
in argument, he has been most unsuccessful, it is 
difficult to say. This evidence he has drawn from 
indefinite sources, and thrown together in a most 
miscellaneous manner. Hence, his obversations 
are so detached, his digressions so numerous, and 
his recurrence to points which have been already 
discussed so frequent, that to give the reader a 
competent idea of what he has introduced, it 
would be necessary to transcribe almost the whole 
letter; 

In those parts of his volume which we have 
already examined; his attacks on the writings of* 

U 5 



253 



the Rev. John and Charles Wesley, and the Rev. 
Mr. Fletcher, were more of a specific nature j so 
that while they involved questions, in the decision 
of which we were deeply interested, they admitted 
of a particular reply. To rescue these names, 
which must be always dear to every friend of vital 
Christianity, I found it necessary to trace the wind- 
ings of error and misrepresentation more minutely 
than the occasion would otherwise have demanded. 
This I have clone, to obviate those imputations 
which Mr. H. has thrown upon their writings, — 
imputations which truth and justice could never 
attach to the doctrines which they taught. 

In the progress of his desultory remarks, Mr. 
II. in the letter before, us, adverts to an article in 
the Methodist Magazine for July 1807, written 
by our greatly respected friend Mr, Marsden, 
" concerning the Witness of the Spirit, and a sense 
of God's favor." From this article, Mr, H. has 
taken several broken sentences, and detached parts, 
for the purpose of animadversion. But as he has 
neither given us the title which it bears, nor re- 
ferred us to the place in which it is to be found, 
1 ,ese omissions apparently intimate a desire to 
preclude all reply to his own remarks. 

Of this little piece there is not a single argu- 
ment which is fully met* And the manner in 
which Mr. I f. has proceeded with his quotations 
and animadversions discovers, at one view, the 
nakedness of that cause which he has undertaken 
*o defend, and the conclusiveness of those argu- 



251 



merits which he has in vain attempted to refute. 
Mr. Marsden begins his little article in the follow- 
ing manner: a When the humble mourner, under 
a deep conviction of his guilt, and weeping at the 
footstool of mercy, earnestly pleads with God for 
a knowledge of his pardoning love, he certainly 
does not at that time enjo} r that testimony of the 
divine favor which is satisfactory to him. And 
yet, we cannot doubt but God is at all times 
equally disposed to receive returning sinners, and 
pardon them when they comply with the terms 
required in the gospel ; one of which is, faith in 
the Lord Jesus Christ. For to him gave all the 
prophets witness, that, through his name, whoso- 
ever believeth on him shall receive remission of 
sins. And with the heart man believeth unto 
righteousness, or justification. On the other hand, 
it is declared, He that believeth not is condemned 
already, and lie that believeth not on the Son shall 
not see life. From which passages of scripture 
it appears, that before a person is enabled to be- 
lieve on the Lord Jesus, he is a stranger to the 
justifying grace of God, and abides under con- 
demnation." 

On taking from this paragraph the scriptures 
last cited, Mr. H. asks as follows : " Were you,, 
my dear Sir, a damned unbeliever in the Son of 
God, on whom you founded all your hopes ? If 
you say, yes ; 1 credit your damnatory testimony 
as little as Mr. Wesley's, but say that you had 
been taught by definition-men ; and they, and the 



252 



devil, disturbed your calm affiance on the Beloved. 37 
(p. So.) From these observations Mr. H. proceeds 
to relate his own experience ; — tells us how he 
was terrified by the definition-men ; — declares that 
M as his faith and repentance towards God and 
Christ grew, he felt no condemnation, had no fear 
of death or bell, enjoyed a peace unspeakable, 
and, before, so unknown, that he began to suspect 
he had justifying faith* (p. 85.) Mr. Marsden, 
it should be remembered, was not speaking of those 
who enjoyed peace, but of those who had it not ; 
—not of those who felt no condemnation, but of 
such as, " under a deep conviction of their guilt, 
were weeping at the footstool of divine mercy." 
The experience of Mr. H., therefore, so far as it 
goes, confirms the doctrine of Mr. Marsden which 
it was brought to oppose, and leaves the whole of 
his argument without any reply. 

In proceeding to lay down, what he deems, 
marks of a justified state, Mr. M. speaks as follows: 
a Another solemn declaration of St. Paul is, that 
if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is 
none of his. And to shew what he means by hav* 
in°- the Spirit of Christ, he proceeds to observe, 
that as many as are led by the Spirit of God, are 
the sons of God — that they have received not the 
spirit of bondage to fear, but the spirit of adoption, 
whereby they cry, Abba, Father; and that the 
Spirit of God beareth witness with their spirits, 
that they are the children of God. So that it ap- 
pears, if we belong to Christ, or are the children 



253 



of God, we must have the witness of the Spirit.' 5 
To this passage Mr. H. replies as follows : " Does 
not Mr. Marsden know that chapter (Rom. viii.) 
contains all the high privileges of the sons of God; 
and when lie had begun, why did he not quote to 
the end, and then conclude that every believer is 
assured that neither height, nor depth, nor any 
other creature, shall separate him from the love o£ 
God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord " The- 
question in debate between us is, whether babes 
in Christ experience them; and whether, because 
they do not) they are in a state of damnation r" 
(p. 91.) Now, according to Mr. Home's argu- 
ment, because some small part of this chapter 
contains the high privileges of the sons of God, 
the whole must in like manner be restricted in its 
application. St. Paul says, H Now, if any man 
have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his." 
(Rom. viii. 9.) Will Mr. H. affirm that this pas- 
sage belongs to none but adult Christians who are 
matured in tiie divine life ? If this be asserted, it 
will follow, that Christians may be babes in Christ 
without his Spirit, and, consequently, as these 
babes must be in the favor of God without his 
Spirit, that this Spirit in the believer's heart is not 
essential to salvation. Such doctrine must give a 
fatal stab to experimental religion, as well as flatly 
contradict the Apostle, who positively declares— 
" if any man have not the Spirit of Christ ; he is 
none of his." 



254 



But it is needless to vindicate what the medi- 
tated blow has not been able to reach. On com- 
paring what Mr. Marsden has written, with the 
observations which Mr. Home has made upon 
some detached parts, no props, no elucidation, 
no further defence, appear necessary. Not a 
single argument is refuted. The scriptures adduced 
remain in all their force, by retaining their wonted 
applications. And I feel no hesitation in asserting, 
that, in proportion as what Mr. H. has written 
from page So to 99> stands contrasted with what 
Mr. Marsden has advanced, from page S0[) to 31 1 
of the Methodist Magazine for 1807, the result, 
I am confident, must be highly favorable to 
the doctrines which we teach. Such a contrast 
will display, in a most convincing light, the energy 
of Mr. Marsden's arguments, which he has fortifi- 
ed by pointed and unequivocal scripture testimony, 
and expose the futility of those attempts which 
Mr. H. has ineffectually made to assail them. 

Hitherto, in examining Mr. Homes book, I 
have chiefly acted on the defensive; and, agree- 
ably to his request in page 45, endeavoured to 
" answer his arguments like an honest man." I shall 
proceed to bring the whole system into full view r 
and shall be able, I trust, to convince the reader, 
that it is inconsistent with the analogy of faith"; 
that it wants conformity to the sacred scriptures ; 
that it is hostile to experimental religion, and 
calculated to produce many pernicious effects and 
consequences. 



255 

To delineate this system with precision is a dif- 
ficult task ; for when, at certain times, some fixed, 
principle appears to be laid down before us, some- 
thing which renders it questionable starts into 
view? and snatches it from our grasp. The gene- 
ral design, however, of Mr. Home's publication, 
so far as it tends to inculcate his doctrines, must 
be gathered from those declarations which form 
its leading features. Among these the following 
particulars appear conspicuous : 

First. " When men bring forth fruits meet 
for repentance, we hesitate no longer, but cousin 
der them bona fide as Christians, though weak in 
faith." (p. 41.) Secondly. u Repentance is re- 
generation, and regeneration repentance," and. " to 
be a true penitent is to be born of the Spirit." 
(p. S3.) Thirdly. " All sincere penitents have a 
weak, general, and obscure faith in Christ ; it is 
impossible that a man should be a subject of 
genuine repentance, and yet be destitute of some 
grain of living faith in Christ." (p, 34.) Fourthly. 
" I am not ashamed nor afraid to affirm, not only 
that men may be in the favor of God and not 
know it, but that, in the nature of things, it must 
be so at one time with every child of God." (p. 68.) 
Fifthly. Mr. H. dissatisfied with Mr. Wesley's 
definition of justifying faith, introduces in its stead 
" the receiving the Lord Jesus Christ the Son of 
God, as made unto us of the Father, wisdom, 
righteousness, sanctification, and redemption, in 
a humble, lowly, penitent; and obedient heart," 



250 



(p. S3.) This definition is afterward explained, 
and placed in alight which the words themselves 
Would hardly induce us to expect : " What is 
faith in God or Christ (Mr. H. asks), but a cordial 
belief of the scripture testimony concern- 
ing the Father and the Son:" (p. 98.) Sixthly. 
" If it be replied, ' only let the person believe in 
Christ, and he will be happy ;' I reply, no suck 
thing."' (p. 98.) Seventhly. He contends, that 
H faith may be possessed without being discerned." 
(p. gg.) Eighthly. " When, therefore, they recog- 
nise th err faith in Christ, they settle in peaceable 
assurance." (p. 99.) Ninthly. " Nor do I deny 
a witness of the Spirit itself." (p. 48.) Tenthly. 
u I deny there is any direct witness." (p. 113.) 
Eleventhly. In- answer to this o^iestion — i How- 
does the Spirit bear witness Mr. H. answers* 
thus, " By the love of God shed abroad in the 
heart. If I am pressed — ' How does the Spirit of 
God shed it abroad;' I answer again, By en- 
lightening the eyes of my understanding to discern 
the abundant love of God revealed to me in the 
word; and this love of God cordially believed^ 
makes me abundantly to love God." (p. 124.) 
Tuelfthly. " Love, and all other fruits of the 
Spirit, are clearly set forth in scripture ; and the 
fruits of the Spirit in the believer exactly answer 
to tlie mould of doctrine into which he is cast, 
even as the wax to the seal. Thus he hath the 
witness in himself." (p. 124.) Thirteenth^* "And 
if our last and only satisfactory appeal lies to the 



257 

Spirit's holy fruits, who does not see that it is by 
them the Spirit truly witnesses ?" (p. 124.) 

Such are the general outlines of Mr* Home's 
theory, impartially taken from his own pages, and 
inserted nearly in his own language. To illustrate 
some of these positions, several of his own expres- 
sions may be produced, and the illustration w T ill 
serve to discover what in many places lies con- 
cealed beneath the equivocation of words. " When 
the citizens of London (says Mr. H.) present to a 
British admiral the freedom of their city in a 
gold box, the freedom of the city is considered as 
a more valuable present than the box which con- 
tains it. But it is not so when God gives me a 
Saviour. All ray good things are in him, as well 
as by him. Pardon and salvation are inseparable 
from him. I therefore preach Christ and eternal 
life in him ; and instead of asking my flock, whe- 
ther they have received pardon, I ask whether they 
have received Christ ?" (p. S6.) On connecting this 
passage with what I have above quoted from p. 98, 
as an illustration of his definition of justifying' 
faith, it will be found that vital Christianity is no 
longer necessary to salvation. " A cordial belief 
of the scripture testimony concerning the 
lather and the Son," w r e there learn, is genuine 
faith in Christ ; and as " all our good things are 
in him," all besides must be purely adventitious. 
If, therefore, by a cordial belief of the scripture, 
testimony I " receive Christ, in whom all graco 
and benediction are deposited;" (p. S8.) if " all 



25S 

my good things" are in him, as well as byhirn/ r the 
* gold box" may remain unopened, and experi- 
mental religion is fairly turned cut of door. 

But quitting for a season these views of the 
subject, are the various branches of this hypothe- 
sis founded on the sacred word ? Are they consis- 
tent with the analogy of faith? Are they not 
hostile to experimental religion? And finally, 
are they not likely to he productive of many fatal 
effects and consequences ? These are questions 
oi the last importance, and demand our most se- 
rious consideration.- Some of these I hope to 
examine in the present letter. 

First. That " all those who bring forth fruits 
meet for repentance are true penitents/* is most 
readily granted by us ; because the fruits w hich 
they produce will induce us to believe that their 
repentance is genuine, and the contrition which 
they manifest sincere. But it will not from thence 
follow, that these characters are " bona Jide Chris- 
tians/' or " born again.'" Tor it must not be for- 
gotten, that the motives from which they act must 
be taken hito-the account, before we can possess 
a proner criterion bv which to decide whether 
they are in the favor of God or not. And yet the 
principle of action is passed over by Mr. H. in 
total silence, as though it had no connection with 
the great work of salvation. If nothing but a 
dread of punishment operates on the mind, and 
the person is induced to submit to the divine com- 
mands in order to mitigate impending; wrath, -or 



Because he will not increase it, then it is evidenl 
that he does not, iiay ? cannot act from a principle- 
of love; and, while he remains in this state, no- 
peace or joy can reign in his soul. And, conse- 
quently, while these internal evidences of his ac- 
ceptance are wanting:, nothing; but external refor- 
mation, resulting from terror which is accompanied 
with remorse, can mark his conduct. It is from, 
this ground that the spiritual condition of his soul 
must be estimated, and from this estimation that 
his character must be denominated. Hence then,, 
though a fear of punishment may produce inw ard 
contrition and outward reformation, and thereby 
afford sufficient evidence of genuine repentance, 
yet nothing can be inferred therefrom, that wUjb 
tend to prove that such a character is so far in the 
divine favor as to have obtained justification. 

St. John tells us, that " He that loveth not, 
knoweth not God, for God is love. (1 John, iv. 8.) 
Now love, it is well known, is an inward affection 
of the soul ; and to the person who possesses it, 
no other evidence of its existence can be so power- 
ful as that sensibility which he feels in his own. 
mind. Whoever, therefore, loves God, must ne- 
cessarily know it;, and he who loves him, and 
knows it, must feel that inward peace which is its 
inevitable consequence. But as love can never 
inhabit that bosom which is influenced to action 
by a principle of terror, the unquestionable result 
is, that such a person " knoweth not God/' The 
situation in which these penitents have been de- 



U60 



scribed, will prove that they are awakened and 
truly repentant sinners : but it will not prove that 
they are justified by faith ; because they have not 
peace with God through oar Lord Jesus Christ* 
See Rom. v. ] . 

But, Secondly 7 we are told, that " repentance 
is regeneration, and regeneration repentance." To 
establish this most strange proposition, which in- 
tentionally confounds repentance with regenera- 
tion, if it do not systematically blend a sense of 
guilt with justification, Mr. H. has produced nei- 
ther scripture nor argument. But he has assumed 
it as a position " which all but sciolists in divinity 
know/' (p. 68.) and erected his theory upon this 
baseless peradventure. St. Luke has said, " Re- 
pent and be converted, that your sins may be 
blotted out f (Acts, iii. 19.) thus evidently mak- 
ing a distinction between repentance and convex 
sion, which he could not have done if repentance 
and regeneration were the same. The same dis- 
tinction is preserved by the Prophet in this gene- 
ral exhortation :: " Let the wicked forsake his 
way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts, and 
let him return unto the Lord, and he willhave 
mercy upon him, and to our God for he will abun- 
dantly pardon." Isa. Iv. 7.) Is it not evident 
from this passage, that the forsaking of wickedness 
must precede the turning to the Lord ? And is it" 
not equally certain, that the former may exist 
without the latter, and that both are absolutely 
necessary in order to the obtaining of that pai> 



261 



cbn which is here promised? Can any word? 
within the compass of language be more express 
sive, to mark those distinctions for which we con- 
tend, than those which the prophet has here placed 
before us? And yet, Mr. H. thoughtlessly asserts, 
that " repentance is regeneration, and regenera- 
tion repentance/' 

Our Lord, in reply to St. Peter, who said, " Be- 
hold we have left all and followed thee," observed 
as follows : " Verily, I say unto you, that ye whicli 
have followed me in the regeneration, when the 
Son of Man shall sit in the throne of his glory, 
ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the 
twelve tribes of Israel." (Matt. xix. £8.) Now, 
if repentance and regeneration be the same, may 
not the words of our Lord run thus — " ye which 
have followed me through the repentance" &c. 
To mention such an interchange of ideas, is itself 
sufficient to expose the error. St. Paul, in his 
epistle to Titus, says, " Not by works of righte- 
ousness which we have done, but according to his 
mercy, he saved us, by the washing of regeneration" 
&c. (Titus, iii. 5.) Can we, wh§n reading these 
words, assert, that regeneration in this passage 
means nothing more than repentance ? Will any 
man affirm, that we are " washed by repentance r" 
Or can we, without offering an insult to the church 
of God, which can hardly be exceeded by any 
thing but that violence which we must offer to the 
sacred word, contend that the terms, or the ideas 
for which they stand, are any way synonymous ? 



162 

Again, the u new creature" spoken of in Gala- 
tians, vi. 15; plainly relates to regeneration; but, 
instead of identifying itself with repentance, evi- 
dently pre-supposes it. IV ben St. Paul says, — 
" If any man be in Christ, he is a new creature," 
(2 Cor. v. 17.) will any reasonable man affirm', that 
he means, that such a person is nothing more than 
'a sincere penitent, or one that possesses only true 
repentance? And when he asserts, that "the in- 
ward man is renewed day b\ r (Jay/' (2 Cor. iv. ] 6.) 
can it be thought that he intends to unfold to his 
hearers and readers the doctrine of repentance ? 
Does the Prophet do nothing more than inculcate 
the doctrine of repentance, when he tells us, that 
they who " wait upon the Lord shall renew their 
strength ;" (Isa. xl. 31.) and does the Psalmist 
intend exactly the same, when he speaks of our 
46 strength, or youth, being renewed like the 
eagle's r" (Psal. ciiL 5.) In all these places, an in- 
fusion of divine power into the soul must be un- 
derstood ; — a power not merely to enable us to 
behold the danger of our situation, but to assist 
us in the performance of those things which are 
acceptable in the sight of God, from motives by 
which an awakened sinner, or mere penitent, cannot 
be actuated. 

When we compare repentance and regeneration 
together, we find several instances in which they 
are distinct from each other. Repentance implies 
an awful sensibility of our sinfulness, and a deep 
contrition for it ; but regeneration implies a deli- 



263 



verance from sin's dominion, and imparts a new 
principle of action. The former includes a change 
of opinion founded on a change of prospect ; but 
the latter a renewal of our nature. The former pre- 
sents us with a prospect of danger; the latter 
gives us power to nee from it. The former 
groans, being burdened ; the latter triumphs in 
being set free. The former expresses the language 
of captivity; the latter rejoices in the libertv of 
the sons of God. The former brings with it a 
sense of the divine displeasure ; the latter given 
us. views of his reconciled favor. And yet we are 
told that " repentance is regeneration, and rege- 
n era tion repentance." 

Thh dli!. Mr. H. asserts, that " all sincere pe- 
nitents have a weak, general, and obscure faith in 
Christ and that " it is impossible that a man 
should be a subject of genuine repentance, and 
yet be destitute of some grain of living faith in 
Christ. " That fgeniiine repentance is inseparably 
connected with some kind of faith in Christ, I 
readily admit ; for no man can feel sorrow for hav- 
ing broken his laws, and trampled under foot his 
dying love, while he has no faith in his existence, 
his power, and his character. Is either will any 
man groan for deliverance from the burden which 
he feels, or petition the Saviour for mercy, unless 
he believes he is both able and ready to receive 
him, and feels some degree of confidence in his 
promises. It is this " weak, general, and obscure 
feith" which keeps hope alive., and banishes des- 



264 



pair; for the latter reigns in triumph, whenever* 
the former wholly disappears. 

But still this u weak, general, and obscure 
faith," though saving in its degree, by keeping the 
penitent from despair, hv no means answers the 
character of that by which he is to be justified in 
the sight of God. And though Mr. Home, dis- 
satisfied with Mr. Wesley's definition of justifying 
faith, has substituted another in its stead, it is one 
which this " weak, general, and obscure faith" of 
penitents will not reach, if we detach from it that 
sweeping explanation which makes all faith to 
consist in " a cordial belief of the Scripture tes- 
timony concerning the Father and the Son." (p. 98.) 
Mr. H. has defined faith to be " the receiving 
Christ as made unto us, wisdom, righteousness, 
sanctification and redemption, in an humble, lowly, 
penitent and obedient heart." Now, though we 
admit this definition, yet in this " general faith" 
which repenting sinners have, there is no receiving 
of Christ into the heart in his gracious characters ; 
there is no reliance or recumbency on him for sal- 
vation ; neither does " he dwell in their hearts by 
faith." On the contrary, doubts and personal un- 
belief so far prevail with the penitent, as to keep 
alive in his soul that sorrow through which he 
waters his conch with his tears. And hence he 
laments his want of the Saviour, and feels his 
necessity of some inward evidence that he is born 
of God 

That Christ has tasted death for sinners, and 



5>0o 

that he is included in the number, he reaclily ac- 
knowledges; but this " general faith" affords him 
no satisfaction. This general belief he possessed 
prior to his being awakened, and yet he is fully 
conscious that he was then in a state of spiritual 
unbelief, notwithstanding his firm belief of the 
scripture testimony. On comparing, indeed, his 
present with, his former state, he finds within him- 
self a remarkable difference, lie now feels a per- 
sonal conviction from above, bringing home the 
same truths with irresistible power, and saying \, 
him — " Thou art the man." He, therefore; finds 
a necessity of having something more than ** a. 
general faith" in the promises of the gospel, to 
accomplish his deliverance from the burden which 
lie feels. Prior to his being awakened, his per- 
suasion of his sinfulness, and his faith in Christ 
vand his gospel, strongly resembled each other. 
Both were general ; both were uninfmential ; — the 
former permitted him to live in sin, and the latter 
to neglect and disregard the Saviour of the worhh 
Cut now the commandment, brought home with 
power, havii>g completely slain him, his convic- 
tions are become personal, powerful, jand penetrat- 
ing ; and nothing can counteract their effects, but 
grace realized through a degree of faith which is 
equally personal, powerful, and energetic. What 
a dangerous error is it then to instruct penitents, 
that, though their convictions are keen, personal^ 



266 



and piercing, they may be justified by a faith 
which is " weak, general, and obscure ?" 
• Fourthly. Mr. H. affirms, that " men may not 
only be in the favor of God and not know it, but 
that it must be so in the nature of things at one 
time with every child of God." That the know- 
ledge of salvation by the remission of sins, is at- 
tainable in the present life, is declared in scripture 
too plainly, it might be thought, to be misunder- 
stood, or successfully controverted by any w r ho 
profess to favor those evangelical views of religion 
which the gospel affords. St. Luke informs us, 
that one grand design of Christ's coming into the 
world, " was to give knowledge of salvation unto 
his people, by the remission of their sins." (Luke, 
i. 77.) Our Lord has said, " If any man will do 
his will, he shall know i>f the doctrine, whether it 
be of God." (John, vii. 17.) In short, the whole 
current of scripture presents this truth to our view, 
that " this is life eternal, to know thee the only 
true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent." 

This important doctrine, Mr. Home cannot be 
charged with denying, or at least only in an indi- 
rect manner. He allows the thing to be possible, 
and even attainable by Christians of an exalted 
character, who know how to " recognise their 
faith;" but at the same time he contends, that 
" it is not essential to salvation." (p. 33.) That 
a knowledge of our being accepted is not essen- 
tial to acceptance itself, i. e. does not constitute 



267 



any part of it, when considered in the abstract, we, 
with Mr. Wesley, readily allow : and the reason 
is obvious : acceptance must precede our know- 
ledge of it, because this knowledge presupposes 
the fact, just as a shadow presupposes a substance, 
and'is evidently founded upon it. Acceptance is 
an act of God ; but our knowledge of it is a 
branch, a primary branch, of experimental religion. 
If, therefore, this had been the only point for 
which Mr. H, had contended, no room would 
have remained for any difference of opinion. 

But though we grant that acceptance and our 
knowledge of it, are two distinct ideas, and allow 
that the latter cannt>t be included in the former, 
or form any part of it ; still we contend, that they 
are so closely connected together, that the former 
cannot be recognised by us without' the latter. 
Here we are completely at issue with Mr. EL, who 
" affirms, that men may not only be in die favor 
of God and not know it, but that it must be so 
in the nature of things, at one time, with every 
child of God." 

That justification is by faith, we gather from 
the plain language of scripture : " Being justi- 
fied by faith, we have peace with God through our 
Lord Jesus Christ." (Rom. v. L) Now, faith is 
an inward assent which the mind yields to any 
given proposition, when it is supported by proof ; 
and, whether it justifies or not, its existence can 
be ascertained only by an evidence which is purely 
mental. The same Apostle who has tqjd us ; that 



268 



justification is by faith, has said, that " faith is 
the evidence of things not seen." (Heb. xi. 1.) 
Now, nothing can be more plain than this, that 
if the evidence of any given fact fails us, the fact 
instantly ceases to be an object of belief, and in 
many cases becomes totally unknown. Is not, 
therefore, that hypothesis very presumptuous, 
which peremptorily asserts, not only, that " a man 
mav be in the favor of God and not know it, but 
that in the nature of things it must be so, at one 
time, with every child of God," and that " he may 
have justifying: faith without beino; able to dis- 
cern it/ (p. 99 ) 

Nor can it be of any avail to assert, that "jus- 
tifying faith is to be inferred from the external 
fruits which it produces." I grant, that to those 
who are spectators of my conduct, the effects 
which result from my faith are of the last impor- 
tance. They will be enabled by them to appre- 
ciate the reality of my experience ; for these 
fruits will corroborate or contradict what I profess 
to have obtained and to enjoy. But these exter- 
nal fruits are not the only, nor even the primary 
evidence by which f. can be certified of the exist- 
ence and quality of my faith. That the quality, 
as well as the existence of faith, must be thus un- 
derstood, is evident, because that which the Apostle 
describes as " the evidence of things not seen/' is 
rastifyins: faith: and it is imDossibie that we can 
retain the just import of the term, if we discard 
the quality which it designates. Now, if justify- 



269 

frig faith is to' be inferred only from the fruits and 
effects which result from it, how can this faith ever 
be admitted as the evidence of things not seen ? 
While inference is the only proof that we have of 
the existence of justifying faith, this faith itself 
jean never be an evidence of objects still more 
remote ; because, if this were to be admitted, in- 
ference must be built upon inference, and faith 
itself would actually want that very evidence which 
it is presumed to impart. 

If justifying faith, under any given circumstance, 
can only be ascertained to exist in the manner 
above stated, instead of being " the substance,? 
it can hardly be the shadow " of things hoped 
for." It, therefore, no longer bears the charac- 
teristic mark which the Apostle has given to faith,- 
and, consequently, cannot be that which he has 
described as " the evidence of things unseen, the 
substance of things hoped for." For certain it is, 
that a faith which can be known to exist only 
through those outward fruits and effects which 
are presumed to result from it, can never be ad- 
mitted as an evidence to prove the existence of 
any other thing, much less can it be considered as 
a substance, w hen it is less than a shadow. It, 
therefore, retires from that definition which St. 
Paul has given of faith, and can be nothing more 
than the creature of imagination, or the tool of 
an hypothesis. 

Should it be said, that " outward works form 
only a part of ihe evidence which faith affords/' 



270 



no advantage can be gathered from hence to favor 
those who argue for the hypothesis. I know the 
Apostle has declared, that " being justified by 
faith, we have peace with God." and that peace is 
here asserted to be an inward evidence. But da 
those possess this inward peace, who mourn after 
an absent God ? Do those possess this peace, 
who neither " discern their faith, nor feel com- 
fort r ?> The want of peace is that which creates 
their sorrow. Peace is what they seek more 
earnestly than thousands of gold and silver. For 
this they wait with anxious solicitude ; and because 
they find it not, they refuse to be comforted till 
God speaks peace to their souls. -How then can. 
inward evidence be pleaded as a proof of faith 
•in any repentant sinner, when this is the very 
blessing of which he is wholly destitute, and 
when we are assured that " a man may be in the 
favor of God and not know it ?" What then, 
under these circumstances, but outward evidence 
can remain ? And if nothing but outward evidence 
can be found, we must again hasten to our former 
conclusion. A faith, therefore, wMch may any 
way be supposed to exist, that affords no " evi- 
dence of things unseen," that is not "the sub- 
tsance of things hoped for," and that brings no 
peace into the soul, can never be a faith wfrich 
justifies in the sight of God, nor be that which 
the Apostle has described, 

Outward works, I giant, will afford corrobo- 
rative evidence of the quality of faith; but, how- 



271 



ever excellent they may appear in the sight of 
men, they must spring from proper motives, and 
be influenced into being by proper causes, to be 
pleasing and acceptable to God. But both faith 
and its quality must be ascertained by some evi- 
dence independently of those good works which 
are visible ; and, therefore, the existence of both 
must be determined hy some other criterion. For 
though no effect can exist without an adequate 
cause, yet these good works which appear, can 
never, in all ordinary cases, afford a sufficiencj 7 of 
indubitable evidence to enable spectators to deter- 
mine on the motive from whence they sprang : 
Hence, as the motive from which the action 
springs, stamps the value of the action itself, 
nothing can be more absurd than to attempt to 
appreciate the quality of the motive by that 
of the action which derives all its excellencies 
from it. This would compel us most completely 
to argue in a circle : first, the motive must give 
value to the action, and then the action must give 
value to the motive. The truth is, we must have 
some other criterion by which to ascertain the 
nature of our faith, than that which these good 
works are able at all times to furnish, or remain 
destitute of that evidence which is necessary to 
enable us to ascertain it. This evidence, reason, 
scripture, and experience, have taught us where 
to seek, and how to find. 

Reason tells us, that whatever is an evidence, 
must, in order to support that character, not 
only exist; but shine by its own lustre, or it can- 



2 

not bear testimony to any given fact. If this be 
not admitted, it must be supposed to impart a 
greater perspicuity of evidence than that which 
substantiates its own existence ; — a circumstance 
which will compel us to conclude that it com- 
municates that very proof which it must be ad- 
mitted to want. But as nothing can communi- 
cate what it has not, faith can never be an evi- 
dence of things unseen, while its nature can 
only be ascertained by those very effects which a 
pure motive is necessary to render excellent. 

\i we appeal to the scriptures, their language 
is decisive. They tell us, that u faith is an evi- 
dence of things not seen, the substance of things 
hoped tor f and, consequently, that it must exist in . 
ways not subjected to the above charges of absurdi- 
ty. They furthermore observe, that with the heart 
man believeth unto righteousness :" (Rom. x. 10.) 
fchat " he that believeth on the Son of God hath the 
witness in himself:*' ( i John v. 30.) that "whosoever 
believeth on liini > shall receive remission of sins :'\ 
( Acts x. 43.) and that " he that believeth on the 
Son hath everlasting life." ( John, iii. 36.) 

Experience also concurs with the testimony of 
reason and scripture. The sacred writings present 
us with the map of our spiritual journey, and 
direct the Christian how to visit those heights and 
depths which they describe. The love of God 
shed abroad in the heart by the Holy Ghost 
given unto us, is the permanent source of our ex- 
perimental knowledge, that Christ hath power on . 
e arth to forgive sins. From this principle^ does that 



9- *M 

faith which works by love start into exist- 
ence, and, shining by its native lustre, become 
an evidence of things not seen with our bodily 
organs. Hence we view it as the substance or 
subsistence of things hoped for; and, through 
that light which is imparted with it to the mind, 
we are led to know the nature of that motive 
from which we act, and to receive an assurance 
that the life we live in the flesh is by faith in 
the Son of God, who hath loved us and given 
himself for us. From this inward principle peace 
flows into the soul ; from this the fruits of the 
Spirit spring - f by this the consolations of grace 
are realized ; and through this we have our fruit 
unto holiness. Thus we walk in the light of 
God's reconciled countenance as children of the 
light, and have fellowship with the Father: and 
the Son through the eternal Spirit. And dismiss- 
ing that doctrine which would absurdly instruct 
us to believe, that we a may know that we are in 
the favor of God without knowing it," as a con- 
tradictory chimera, we receive the Saviour into 
our hearts by faith, and, having everlasting life, 
rejoice in hope of the glory of God. 

But this principle, which Mr. Home lays down, 
should be rejected, not merely because it has an 
hostile aspect in the light in which it has been 
considered, but because it opens the door to many 
pernicious effects. He has said, "I am not ashamed . 
nor afraid to athrm, not only that men may be . 
in the favor of God and not know it, but that in 

N 6 



274 



the very nature of things it must be so, at one 
time, with every child of God." (p. 68.) It is in 
this point that his principles chiefly centre, and 
from it that many destructive consequences may 
be deduced. 

L This principle, that a man may be in the 
favor of God and not know it, has a natural ten- 
dency to lead to Pharisaic delusion. The ma 
Who is thus taught to believe that he is in th 
favor of God, will naturally inquire, how ca 
this thing be ? And the only reason which can 
assigned to satisfy him must be, because he brings 
forth fruits meet for repentance : for " when men 
bring forth fruits meet for repentance, we hesi- 
tate no longer, but consider them bona fide Chris- 
tians, though weak in faith *' (p. 41.) Now, every 
one will allow, that it is natural for an awakened 
sinner, to desire that others should not think more 
unfavourably of his state than he does himself; 
this must inhabit the bosom of every one who- 
seeks earnestly for peace. Indeed, one source 
of his expected consolation is, that those on 
whose judgment he relies, endeavour to sooth 
his wounded spirit. When, therefore, he is told 
that his conduct alone is the principal, if not the 
only basis of that judgment, by which his spiri- 
tual condition is to be estimated, his utmost atten- 
tion will be directed to this point. And as- in an 
exact proportion as this stands fair he will be 
consoled, so in the same proportion he Will be 
taught to pay le,ss regard to "those convictions 



275' 



which he feels. A scrupulous observance of every 
instituted rite, he will be instructed to believe, is 
an evidence of that faith which he " does not 
discern," and a convincing proof that he is " in 
the favor of God, though he does not know it." 
The influence of example, and fallacious argu- 
ment, will confirm the opinion which error thus 
calls into existence ; time will render the malady 
inveterate ; and in proportion as these principles 
predominate, the Pharisee will become complete. 

2. An inevitable consequence of the previous 
error is, that conviction will in time be stilled. 
For Avhile the outward fruits of repentance form- 
the rule of judgment by which both himself and 
others are to be guided in their decision on his 
spiritual state, the keenness of his conviction will 
be blunted by having the attention directed to 
what must be deemed a more important object. 
And in proportion as the acuteness of these con- 
victions dies away, he will be protected in the 
delusion in which Ue was first taught to confide ; 
and will be instructed to furnish himself with 
additional arguments drawn from this source — • 
that he is making some advances in the narrow 
way that leadeth to life. IVith a conduct strictly 
moral, and a mind thus fortified in error, he will 
be placed beyond the reach of salutary admo- 
nition. For should some faithful friend attempt 
to warn him of his danger, by hinting that Jiis 
heart is unrenewed, he will be charged wuh 
£ bending all his strength to break his peace," 



2/6 

(p. SB.) And should his friend, in order to con- 
vince him of his error, relate his own experience, 
and s;ive him an account how he was eausrht in the 
same snare atiddeli vered from it, the deluded man is 
already furnished with the folio wing reply : " I credit 
your damnatory testimony as little as Mr. Wesley's : 
you have been taught by definition-men ; and they 
and the devil disturbed your calm affiance on the 
Beloved." (p. 85.) Thus gathering strength from 
public declaration and private persuasion, convic- 
tion will no longer be a troublesome companion. 
It will die away ; and he who before trembled - 
from an apprehension of danger, will now sleep- 
in undisturbed securitv. 

3. One error* generally leads to, and begets 
another. The same principle which tends to stifle 
conviction, tends also to invalidate the testimony 
of conscience. The man who can be taught to 
believe that he may be in the favor of God with- 
out knowing it, and in direct opposition to the 
feelings of his heart, will easily be led to suspect- 
the testimony of that principle, which, as he ima- 
gines, Lad imposed upon his judgment. When, 
therefore, he is persuaded that bis conscience has 
already been proved to be erroneous, and that 
too in the acutest evidence which it ever bore, he 
will suspect its veracity on all future occasions ; 
he will treat its dictates with indifference, if not 
with contempt; and dismiss it as an unworthy and 
suspicious puide. When assailed bv its thunder 
en ajiy occasion which does not interfere with his 



m 

outward morals, he will naturally reason thus : 
"I have already felt impressions which were equal- 
ly severe with those which I now feel. 1 treated 
them with the utmost seriousness, and experienced 
much sorrow on the occasion ; but friendly in- 
struction and matured experience have taught me, 
that the charges which it brought were unfound-- 
ed, and I am resolved to be no longer the dupe 
of what has once been detected as an imposture. 3 
By what arguments such reasonings can be repelled > 
by those who affirm that " a man may be in the 
favor of God and not know it/' " may have faith \ 
and not discern it," " be justified and not have 
comfort," i confess myself at a loss to say. 

4. Another evil which flows from this perni- 
cious principle is, that it leads to a false and de- 
lusive peace. Indeed, when convictions are, stifled, 
and the clamours of conscience are no longer 
heard with attention, a false peace is the inevitable 
result. The same occasions which blunt the edge 
of conviction, will induce the person to conclude 
that lie now begins to feel a small decree of that 
peace to which he is conscious that he had been 
an entire stranger. This circumstance will lead 
him to place an additional degree or confidence in 
those principles ,by which he has been deceived; 
and this confidence, in its turn, will induce lam to 
solace himself on his growing stupidity, which he 
has fatally mistaken tor peace, and will urge him 
to sing a requiem to his departed fears* Thus will 
be be insensibly led to speak peace to his soul, 



278 



though God has not spoken it; and to sink deeper 
and deeper into a deception that originated in 
his adopting a principle, which taught him to 
believe that he might be in the favor of God and- 
not know it. 

5. This imaginary light will lead those who are 
governed by it, to walk in real darkness. Confi- 
dent of being in the divine favor, the half- slum- 
bering penitent can no longer approach the throne 
of grace, in the language and with the feelings of 
the Publican, crying, u God be merciful to me a 
sinner." He may, indeed, pray for brighter dis- 
plays of the divine approbation ; but the delusion" 
under which he labours, rendering him insensible 
of his real state, will effectually prevent him from 
petitioning for justifying faith. Tins he will 
flatter himself he already possesses, though he 
does not discern it. And full of this conviction, 
he will aim to erect the superstructure without 
laying a proper foundation: and, by cherishing 
this radical error, defeat his own designs. So 
far as this principle gains the ascendency in his 
mind, he will imagine that he has made im- 
provements in the divine life ; and fancying him- 
self to be rich and increased in goods, he will find 
no inclination to suspect that he is poor, and 
miserable, and blind, and naked. To such characters 
we know who hath said— " If ye were blind, ye 
should have no sin ; but now ye say We see ; there- 
fore your sin remaineth." (John, ix. 41.) Princi- 
ples which lead to such conclusions; ought to 



379 



have something more alluring than a direct opposi- 
tion to scripture, to recommend them. Mr. H. 
has said, that " a man may he in the favor of 
God and not know it but St. John has informed 
us that a If we say that we have fellowship with 
him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the 
truth;' (1 John, i. 6.) 

6. The principle against which I argue, will 
naturally lead those who are governed by it, to 
entertain preposterous ideas of faith. What ab- 
surd notions must I not have of this exalted grace,, 
when I am led to believe that I can be justified 
by it, and obtain the favor of God through its 
instrumentality, and yet know nothing either of 
the instrument or the blessing I It must induce 
me to conclude, that justifying faith began its 
saving operations in that moment when I was 
personally convinced that I was in a state of un- 
belief. I must admit it to be a something which 
is an evidence of th ; ngs unseen, though 1 have 
no immediate knowledge of its testimony, or dis- 
cernment of its existence ; and consider it as an 
invisible a°*ent through which I have laid hold on 
the- Saviour and received the favor of God, though 
these blessings are equally unknown. It is an evi- 
dence which aticrds no proof of the fact which 
it witnesses, — that realises a blessing which is un- 
perceived even while it is possessed, — and, though 
luminous in itself, and capable of shining by its 
native lustre, Is to be ascertained either by that 
cloud of sorrow which arises from a consciousness 



280" 



of its absence, or to be inferred from that outward 
reformation of conduct which may have arisen 
from another source. If this faith be recommended 
in the bible, I frankly acknowledge I know not where 
to find it. But I appeal to any reasonable man, 
whether these contradictions do not flow from that 
principle which admits that justification is by faith, 
and yet contends, that " a man may be in the 
favor of God and not know it? and " have faith 
without discerning it ?" 

7. The principle before us tends to conceal the 
motive from which our actions flow, and instructs 
us to infer it from the effects produced. Whether 
the actions of penitents result from the favor of 
God imperceptibly granted, from a dread of pu- 
nishment, from interested designs, or from any other 
cause, it is to the effects alone that we are directed 
to look. " Patiently wait (we are told) till causes 
develope their legitimate effects*" (p. 42.) I grant 
that this principle is laid down as a rule by which 
we are directed to estimate the motives of others: 
But if those characters of whom we judge, are 
instructed to believe that " they may be in the* 
favor of God without knowing it,'* by what othet 
rule than this which we prescribe to ourselves, shall 
they estimate the sources of their actions I " They 
will feel justified in judging of themselves in the 
same manner that others judge of them." (p. S€.) 
Indeed, every other rule of judgment is hostile to 
the principle established, and would destroy it if 
admitted. If, therefore; awakened individuals 



281 



have no other rule by which to estimate the motives 
of their own actions, but by interring them from 
the actions themselves; the inward principle, as 
well as their consciousness of it, may be dismissed 
as a fallacious guide, while their outward conduct 
, stands fair. And when this ij; once granted, it is 
impossible to say to what fatal effects it may not 
lead us, or after how much error and absurdity 
such a rule shall cease to operate. 

8. If " a man may be in the favor of God with- 
out knowing it," why may he not be a penitent 
without knowing it ? 1 see no reason that can be 
assigned for the one, which will not reach the 
other. Neither does it appear to be a greater 
insult offered to common sense, to suppose the 
latter than the former ; especially, when we take 
into the account living faith, which, though the 
instrument of justification may, it is said, exist 
and operate " without being discerned." For it 
I must infer the motive of my action from the 
action itself — the genuineness of repentance from 
the fruits which it produces — and the certainty of 
regeneration from identifying it with that repent- 
ance, the genuineness of which is only to be known 
by inference ; — if I must infer the reality of justi- 
fying faith from its being inseparable from peni- 
tence — and gather assurance from a recognition of. 
my faith — surely, penitence itself maybe inferred 
from reformation; and the instant this is admitted,, 
the vortex of heathen morality will instantly furnish 
Christianity with a grave, If then, by making: 



282 



this little stride, (which, analogy says, may he 
justly made, and which it is to be feared too many 
will actually make,) I am permitted to infer peni- 
tence from reformation, as I am to infer the divine 
favor from similar actions, the conclusion will he 
inevitable, that a man may be a real penitent with- 
out knowing it. For I feel no hesitation in assert- 
ing, that if our knowledge of penitence is no 
more essential to its existence, than our discern- 
ment of faith is to the existence of faith, the 
former may be as reasonably inferred as the latter. 
Under circumstances so inauspicious, convictions, 
according to this hypothesis, will dwindle into non- 
entities, since reformation will prove their inutility. 
The ministers of the Gospel will then only have 
<tf to denounce perdition, on all who live as 'prac- 
tical atheists in the world and " here their pain- 
ful damnatory commission, which is the strange 
work of the God of love, will end." (p. 43.) 

9. But granting that penitence may not be so 
easily inferred from reformation as I have supposed, 
what shall prevent the man who has been brought 
to believe that repentance and regeneration are the 
same, from inferring that he has " a witness of 
the Spirit, which, though it can be produced to 
no other man, is of immense importance to the 
confirmation of the believer himself?" (p. 46.) 
Can any reason be assigned, according to the hy- 
pothesis, that shall fairly repel or prevent this, 
conclusion ? A direct witness is positively denied ; 
(p, 113.) and,, consequently,, no witness but that 



283 



which is indirect; remains. An indirect witness 
can bring no direct testimony, either of the thing 
which it professes to establish, or of its own exis- 
tence ; and, consequently, it is only to be inferred 
from external actions, from sources of authority, 
or from preconceived principles. And all such as 
embrace the hypothesis, have an equal right and 
as much reason to affirm, that they have " a wit- 
ness of the Spirit/* though they do not know it, as 
Mr. H. has to " affirm that a man may be in the 
favor of God and not know it." 

10. From fancying himself to possess " a witness 
of the Spirit/* the journey is short to another con- 
clusion, namely, to his having obtained perfect 
love, if he should think such a blessing attainable, 
and should distinguish it from that witness of the 
Spirit which he has been presumed to infer. For 
having once admitted it as an incontrovertible 
axiom, that repentance and regeneration are the 
same, and that he is now in the favor of God 
though he does not know it, he will readily con- 
clude, that those " apprehensions of wrath" under 
whiph he laboured, are no longer " an unfathom- 
able mystery." He will have already learned that 
" the devil had been falsely accusing him, and 
misrepresenting God to him/' (p. 94.) and from 
hence will conclude, that he has little reason to 
depend on the testimony either of his judgment 
or his conscience, w T hen they lead him to suspect 
that he has not attained unto a perfect man, unto, 
the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ,, 



284 



From taking a retrospect of the past, he will cal- 
culate on the future, and proceed ip a manner 
somewhat like the following, to fortify himself in 
those errors by which he has been deceived: "Though. 
I feel within myself thoughts and dispositions 
which appear diametrically opposite to that meek 
and lowly mind which was in Christ ; yet I know, 
by past experience, that the testimony of my judg- 
ment and conscience is a suspicious test. I well 
remember the time, when their united evidence 
induced me to believe that I was under the wrath 
of God ; and very severe were my sufferings on 
that account. The snare, however, was at last 
broken, through the instructions which I received 
from those who knew my state better than I then 
knew it myself; and I discovered the cause of my 
inward conflict to be nothing more than a strata^ 
gem of the devil to rob me of my peace. But I 
have since learned, that I was at that very time in 
the favor of God though I did not then know it, 
and that I had justifying faith though I could not 
discern it, nor find comfort, nor perceive within 
my bosom any thing but terror, sorrow, and un- 
belief. Having thus learned wisdom by the things 
which I have suffered, I will carefully avoid in 
future that rock on which I have already struck ; 
and, in hope believing against hope, conclude 
myself to be fit for heaven in opposition to those 
false accusations of the devil who is continually, 
jnisrepresenting God to me. As to my life and 
P,\Qi:ais ; I find them, on a strict review, tQ be irre 



285 



proachable, so far as irreproaehableness can attach 
itself to us in the present imperfect and infirm 
state of things. I am charitable to the necessities 
of others, I pay every man his honest due, I 
avoid those vices to which I was addicted in my 
unconverted state, I neglect no means of grace, 
and to the utmost of my power endeavour to obey 
the laws of God: This I know, by past experience, 
is the most substantial testimony of my being in 
the divine favor. It bore me out, when inward 
evidences could not be obtained ; it overpowered 
the darkness which overwhelmed my soul, and 
affords at all times a criterion by which the world 
may judge. The sins which marked my life prior 
to my conversion, and those infirmities which 
have beset me since, I have already carried to 
the Saviour of mankind, who died for sinners. I 
believe on him as he is revealed in the gospel, and 
dismiss my wicked doubts, from a full persuasion 
that " assurance is not essential to salvation." That 
this faith which I cherish is genuine, I have no 
reason to question ; for " what is faith in God or 
Christ, but a cordial belief of the scripture testi- 
mony concerning the Father and the Son ?" (p. 98.) 
This is the faith which, I am confident, I now pos- 
sess.— It is a much easier task to deny these 
conclusions than to repel them. 

11. The theory before us, tends to lead those 
who embrace it, to brand the inward witness of 
the Spirit with the name of enthusiasm. That 
there is any direct witness, Mr. Home positively 



28(i 



denies, (p. 113.) u And what more dangerous and 
fallacious criteria (he asks) can we resort to, than 
assurance and non-assurance? They (i. e. peni- 
tents) will feel justified to judge of themselves by 
the same rule that ministers judge of them/' (p. SC.) 
The rule by which ministers judge of this subject 
ma}' be gathered from these words — " What pro- 
phet or apostle bears witness against the devil- 
begotten sin of non-assurance r' ip. 45.) Let 
these principles be once established in the mind of 
a person converted to them, and he will view the 
doctrine of assurance in a very suspicious light. 
They will furnish him with occasions to treat the 
subject with indifference, and, perhaps, with con- 
tempt 5 and induce him to suspect either the 
judgment or the veracity of those who profess to 
have obtained a blessing to which he is a stranger, 
and of which he half doubts the existence. Urged 
by this false and dangerous principle, the delud- 
ed character that I have supposed, will scrutinize 
the professions of him whom he suspects, with 
malicious eagerness, — will reflect on his language 
with critical malevolence, — will examine his con- 
duct with inhuman diligence, — will magnify every 
flaw which he discovers, into a dreadful chasm,— 
will compare it with a standard of perfection 
which he feels little solicitude in attaining ; and, 
after despising as " a mock sun" that steady light 
which never illuminated his own soul, will deride 
" the high-flying assurances" which he hears, and 
gravely pronounce the man to be actuated by en- 
thusiasm* 



287 



$2. These principles are wonderfully calculated 
to make us indifferent about higher attainments, 
Being once satisfied in our minds, that " assurance 
is not essential to salvation/' and that " weak and 
ignorant Christians have it not/' our inducements 
to pursue this blessing will lose almost all their 
influence* Our principles will have instructed us 
to believe that assurance is not essential to salva- 
tion, and we shall feel but little solicitude about 
the mere non-essentials of religion. Solacing 
ourselves with being regenerated, or born again, 
because we have passed through the sincerity of 
repentance ; and consoling ourselves with that 
false peace which has resulted from the belief that 
we were in the favor of God though we did not 
know it, the satisfaction which will spring from 
hence, will instruct us to detach privilege from duty, 
and to estimate higher attainments as a matter of 
choice rather than obligation. The brightest pros- 
pects which the acquirement of assurance can hold 
out, will be counterbalanced by that indolence 
through which we have been balled asleep ; and 
we shall be half tempted to construe ourlukewarm- 
ness into an evidence of our humility, because we 
content ourselves with " the crumbs which fall 
from our M aster's table." To confirm us in this 
error, the dread of falling into enthusiasm will 
haunt us like an angry ghost ; and those epithets 
which we have probably bestowed on others, will 
terrify us with the dangers of presumption which 
©ur imaginations had raised. Tenacious of our 



288 



principles, " our ministers will no longer be able 
to command terrifying arguments to iash our con- 
sciences. We shall think ourselves perfectly safe 
in our low attainments, despise higher dispensa- 
tions, and bury our talent of grace till it is 
taken from us, and given to those who improve 
their own." (See Fletcher, vol. iv. p. I 62.) 

IS. The principles which Mr. Home inculcates, 
will incline humble penitents to doubt the attain- 
ableness of assurance : By asserting that " well- 
instructed Christians will have assurance, but that 
weak and ignorant Christians have it not," (p. S3.) 
those who are really mourning after God, and 
labouring under a sense of his displeasure, are 
taught to believe that the blessing: is not to be 
attained by them. Humbled under a sense of 
their manifold iniquities, they dare not look up to 
Heaven for so important a favor. A conviction of 
their unworthiness will keep them at an awful 
distance from this peculiar manifestation of grace, 
which none but the " well instructed" are privileged 
to enjoy. This will prove at once the grave of 
their expectations and their hopes. No man can 
be more sensible of his ignorance than he who is 
awakened by the Spirit of God; and, consequently, 
no man can be more remote from assurance, than 
such a weak and ignorant character as he is zchen 
taught by such instructors. While, therefore, he 
continues to view himself in this light, he will 
not look up for assurance, nor expect it ; but, on 
the contrary, he will think it wholly inapplicable 



289 



to his case and condition. And as humility id 
inseparable from that penitential sorrow which he is 
presumed to possess, he will continue to walk 
in darkness to the close of life, nor once con- 
ceive that assurance is to be realised by himself. 

14. From the admission of the preceding 
error, there is another which may be expected 
to follow. Such a character, as I have above de- 
scribed, will have no criterion by which to dis- 
tinguish faith from presumption. Instructed to 
believe, that " weak and ignorant Christians have 
not assurance," and fully persuaded that he 
answers this description, he will naturally con* 
elude, that none of the promises of the gospel, 
which hold out the consolations of the Spirit, are 
applicable to his case. And while labouring under 
this deception, it will not be in his power to 
exercise that faith of expectation, by which alone 
the blessing is to be realised. The thought of pre- 
sumption will continually deter him from stepping 
into the pool, and completely rivet those fetters 
which the hypothesis first put on. A strict adher- 
ence, therefore, to the principles which are thus 
inculcated, must cause his faith to rest perpetu- 
ally on inference, and, consequently, prevent him 
from the enjoyment of a blessing which the well 
instructed experience ; but which, being inappli- 
cable to his case, and not essential to salvation^ 
as he imagines, he will neither seek nor find. 

15. Among the evils to which this theory leads, 
its natural tendency to banish experimental reli- 



290 



gion from the human mind, ought not to be for- 
gotten. " What is faith (Mr. H. asks) in God 
or Christ, but a cordial belief of the sceipture 
testimony concerning the Father and the Son F 
(p. 99.) "We insist (he adds in the next page) 
these penitents have cordially received Christ; and 
the only reason why they have not comfort, is be- 
cause you stupify them with damnatory clauses, 
and they do not discern their own faith, even 
while it saves them from habitual sin. Our way 
of comforting them is simple and scriptural. We 
point them to Christ, and shew them what faith 
is. When, therefore, they recognise their faith 
in Christ, they settle in peaceable assurance." 
(p. 99.) In these passages we are told that faith is 
a belief of the scripture testimony concerning the 
Father and the Son ; — that this faith may be 
possessed without being discerned, and without 
bringing comfort ;— and, that assurance results 
from our recognition or discernment of our faith. 
What is now become of experimental religion ? 
From what source shall it be drawn, or where shall 
we look to find it ? It is not to be found before | 
faith, because without faith it is impossible to 
please God : it is not to be found in faith, for this is 
nothing more than a "cordial belief of the scripture 
testimony concerning the Father and the Son :" it i 
is not in the consciousness of possessing faith, for i 
such a consciousness is not essential to faith, seeing j 
faith maybe possessed "without being discerned:" it 
is not in the peace of God which results from faith, 



291 



because this peace is not the necessary companion 
of faith ; and " the reason why penitents have 
not comfort" arises from another cause : it is not 
in our seeking assurance, for this flows from 
u our recognition of our faith," which is an act 
of reason : it, therefore, can only result from assur- 
ance, and unhappily this we are told (p. S3.) " is 
not essential to salvation." Few, we believe, who 
enjoy the love of God shed abroad in their hearts, 
will be inclined to barter it for the theory which is 
here set before them ; and fewer still, we fear, who 
embrace this hypothesis, will ever feel much solici- 
tude about seeking the power of godlincss,of which, 
as"being weak and ignoran t," they m list be destitute. 

16. It will tend to confirm backsliders in their 
state of apostacy. Persuaded that a man may be in 
the favor of God and not know it, and that assur- 
ance is not essential to salvation, the man who 
apostatizes in heart, and loses sight of God's 
favor, will have no rule by which to discern his 
awful condition. He may feel guilt upon his 
conscience, but he will console himself that it is 
^nothing but " the devil falsely accusing him." 
(p. 94.) He will feel a sense of the divine dis- 
pleasure, but he will flatter himself that it is only 
u Satan misrepresenting God to him." (p. 94.) He 
will find darkness within, but he will have 
learned that " weak and ignorant Christiana 
have not assurance." (p. 33.) He will long 
for those consolations which he once enjoyed ; but 
he will silence the wicked thought, by pleading 
that u those who receive Christ have not always 



292 



comfort." (p. 99.) He will find himself destitute 
of faith, but he will recollect that "men have 
faith without discerning it." (p. 99.) He will 
reason on the nature of faith, but he will conclude, 
that it is " a cordial belief of the scripture testi- 
mony concerning the Father and the Son." (p. 98.) 
These articles of his creed he will still retain ; and 
though he may not think himself rich and increas- 
ed in goods, he will be insensible that he is 
poor, and miserable, and blind, and naked. And 
while he avoids outward sin, he will preserve the 
criterion by which himself and " learned and ex- 
perienced ministers judge" of his spiritual con- 
dition, and be confirmed in his apostacy. 

17. But, granting that the principles against 
which I argue, should only be embraced in a par- 
tial manner, the effects which I have attributed to 
them will only then be produced in a partial man- 
ner. In this case another evil will arise. Con- 
victions and the theory will keep alive in the 
soul a perpetual warfare. The man who feels 
himself in this situation, will naturally fall into 
a^tate of suspense between the convictions which 
he feels, and the temptations to stifle them which 
the hypothesis holds out. The former will tell 
him that his state is dangerous ; while the latter 
will inform him that his safety is complete : the 
former will lead him to suspect the truth of the 
hypothesis which he has but partially received ; 
ancLthe-hypothesis will instruct him to discard, as 
" the accusations and misrepresentations of the 
devil," the inward apprehensions of his mind ; 



293 



the former will urge him to seek after some relief 
from the anguish which he feels ; but the latter 
will assure him, that " no more dangerous and 
fallacious criteria can he resorted to, than assur- 
ance and non-assurance." Thus buffetted between 
conviction and delusion, harassed with doubts 
while tempted with security, tormented with ap- 
prehensions of danger while labouring to subdue 
them, he will seek rest without being able to find 
it, and spend his days in uncertainty and misery. 

1 8. Another consequence which will frequently 
result from the preceding, is scepticism. The 
man who is taught, by an hypothesis which he 
partially acknowledges, to suspect the validity of 
his own convictions, will be instructed by his own 
convictions to doubt the veracity of the hy- 
pothesis which he cannot cordially receive. 
Suspicions in this case will become mutual ; and 
the mind perpetually labouring under the painfull- 
ness of indecision, will grow familiar with uncer- 
tainty, and, finally, harden into established scepti- 
cism. In this condition the threatenings of the 
scriptures will be defeated in their application, 
through the delusions of the hypothesis ; and the 
promises of the Gospel will lose their allurements, 
through a persuasion which the convictions will 
beget of their unsuitableness. Hence,,, the mind, 
losing all confidence in the authenticity of a re- 
velation which can beget no certainty, and retain- 
ing morality as the only thing which the hypothesis 
and its own convictions concur in pronouncing ex] 



294 



cellent, will dismiss every thing besides as vision* 
aiy and delusive,and settle atlastin confirmed deism. 

ig. Nor will the above evil terminate with the 
person who first becomes its victim. It will power- 
fully influence by bad example. Nothing is more 
natural to the mind of man, than to communi- 
cate to others the discoveries which it has made. 
The individual who finds a gloomy quiet in the 
scepticism which his own folly has matured, will 
readily impart to others, who labour under the 
same painful emotions that he has felt, and who 
walk the same thorny path which he has travelled, 
the dreadful secret of stifling the uneasiness of 
their minds ; he will plead his own example to 
confirm his theory, and imperceptibly instil 
their minds those doubts which now hold 
close captivity, but by which he dreams 
been set perfectly- free. Example and 
u , when they concur, will operate in a most 
powerful manner. And in proportion as this per- 
nicious principle spreads, in the case before us, 
it will give to doubt a growing empire. And 
should it once obtain a general ascendency among 
professors, it would prove fatal to experimental reli- 
gion ; and, in an exact ratio to its extent, would have 
a tendency to banish moral certainty from the world. 

20. The hypothesis before us tends to bewilder 
the understanding. When those to whom we 
look with confidence for instruction, boldly affirm, 
that they u know a man may be justified, and 
have solid peace with God^ and not know that his 



295 

trust in Christ is- faith, and his peace God's own 
seal of pardon (p. 38.) — when these same mi- 
nisters declare, that "a. man may have faith and 
not have comfort," that " he may have faith and 
not discern it/' and that " men will feel jus- 
tified in judging of themselves by the same rule 
that ministers judge of them ;" (p. 32) it is inv 
possible to calculate upon all the conclusions to 
which such affirmations will lead. If I may judge 
of myself by the same rule that ministers judge of 
me, and if they affirm that they " do know 1 may 
be justified and not know that my trust in Christ 
is faith," then 1 may know that I am justified by 
faith, (for no justification can be without faith) 
without knowing that "my faith in Christ is 
faith." And if 1 " may have solid peace without 
knowing that this peace is God's own seal of 
pardon," and u be justified and not have comfort," 
then my having peace, and my being destitute of 
it, must be alike incompetent to afford me any 
evidence of the fact which I am taught to believe. 
And if because I am a child of God, I may,and must 
be, at some time in the favor of God and not know 
it;" (p. 68.) and if I judge of my case as ministers 
judge of it, then I must conclude, that I believe 
I am in the favor of God, while I believe no 
such thing. Such modes of reasoning would re- 
quire a considerable time to carry the human un- 
derstanding to its most exalted state of perfection. 

21. It establishes a false foundation for reason- 
ing. (1.) It teaches me to conclude that I a in in 



296 



the favor of God, though I do not know it; 
thus directing me to infer certainty from ignorance. 
(2.) It teaches that I may know that this faith 
may be possessed without being discerned ; thus 
making the knowledge of a fact to precede the 
perception of it. (3.) It directs me to believe 
the testimony of an evidence, before I am satisfied 
of the existence of the evidence. (4.) It makes a 
recognition of faith necessary to our discernment 
of it; thus depriving faith of its native lustre, and 
compelling us to depend upon the inductions of 
reason for our knowledge of an intuitive principle. 
(5.) It blends repentance with regeneration ; thus 
identifying our knowledge of a disease with its 
cure. The fatal effects which will result from such 
an inversion of established principles, it is less 
difficult to perceive when we survey the hypo- 
thesis, than to avoid when we have once em- 
braced it. 

2. I will not say that such a theory will lead 
us to " damnatory clauses but many will not 
hesitate to conclude, that it will lead to something 
infinitely more awful. It brings the mind of man 
into an insensibility of its condition ; it teaches 
it to view the power of godliness in an indifferent 
light, and tends to confirm it in those delusions 
of which our hearts are most susceptible. It 
tends indeed to give a moral turn to our outward 
conduct, but beyond this it has no efficacy to 
reach. On the contrary, it steels the mind against 
its own convictions, and leads it to disregard im* 



297 



pending dangers ; it deprives it of the most power- 
ful motives to make its calling and election sure, 
and deafens it to those thunders of the divine 
law which were appointed by the wisdom of God 
to drive it to Jesus Christ for personal pardon. 
Habituated to delusion, and strongly fortified 
against every thing that can dispel the charm ; 
— resting in a false peace, and encouraged by the 
temporizing precepts of those watchmen whose 
duty it is, when they see the sword approaching, 
to give the people warning ; — sanctioned by the 
example of others who partake in the melancholy 
calamity, and gliding onward to the close of life 
under a full persuasion that " faith may be pos- 
sessed without being discerned the unhappy spirit 
may be traced to the margin of eternity, on the 
confines of which, if we pause for a moment, we 
may contemplate one of the most finished pictures 
of insensible horror that can be well imagined on 
this side the grave. May God in infinite mercy 
keep every seeking soul from this dangerous pre- 
cipice, through Jesus Christ our Lord ! 

Far be it from me to insinuate, that the con- 
sequences which I have deduced from Mr. Home's 
hypothesis are systematically adopted by him, or 
even viewed in a defensible light. Nothing, I am 
fully persuaded, can be farther from his inten- 
tions, than to inculcate evils which his soul ab- 
hors, To repel consequences which are so per- 
nicious, would be among his earliest efforts, could-, 
he be persuaded that they resulted from his esta*- 

o 5 



298 



Wished principles ; and should his attempt prove 
unsuccessful in his own estimation, he would 
rather abandon the cause than retain its effects. 

But it is not from his estimate, or mine, of 
either of our principles, that the public 
will be guided in their decisions. We may esta- 
blish our premises ; but they will deduce conse- 
quences from them of which we are not al- 
ways aware, to suit their private or their public 
interests. Whatever will sooth the indolence of 
the human heart ; — whatever will widen the path 
which leads to heaven ; — whatever will render the 
road less difficult, will be seized with avidity by all 
who feel a reluctance in bowing their necks to 
the voke of Jesus Christ. Whatever has a tendency 
to blunt the edge of conviction,— to promise 
security to the distressed, to shield the. appre- 
hensive from danger, — —to remove anguish from 
the agonizing heart, --to give peace to the afflict- 
ei,— or to induce earnest seekers to believe that 
they have already obtained that favor of God which 
they seek, bids fair to meet with a favourable 
reception from such characters, how slender soever 
the foundation may be on which, they rest their 
hopes. While, whatever tends to confound the 
different degrees of Christian experience to 
make those who travel towards Mount Zion to 
rest in past attainments; — to insinuate to them that 
the most important blessings which the gospel 
promises to bestow through Christ, are not neces- 
*arv to be known in order to salvation :~and to 



make that which affords intuitive evidence to de- 
pend upon the decisions of reason, must be visi- 
bly pernicious in proportion to the effects pro- 
duced, and hypothetically so, as it tends towards 
them. How far the theory of Mr. H. is impli- 
cated in these charges, those who read his observa- 
tions and mine have a right to determine. 

Collecting together the scattered fragments of 
the hypothesis, and placing them before him in 
an aggregate view, the reader, who experimentally 
knows in whom he has believed, will survey the 
questionable mass with the mingled emotions of 
apprehension and sorrow. He will look back on 
his past experience, and compare it with the hy- 
pothesis which is now placed before him ; and will 
perceive such a disagreement in features, as will 
not easily be reconciled with w T hat he has felt, nor 
be speedily effaced from his memory. He will 
review those awakenings' by the Spirit of God, 
through which he felt the arrows of the Almighty 
wminding him, and recollect the pangs of the 
new birth through which he has passed. He 
will compare his former darkness with his subse- 
quent light, his apprehensions of w rath with a sense 
of his acceptance, and be fully convinced that 
these stages through which he travelled can bear 
no more resemblance to one another, than the hy- 
pothesis does to both. And on comparing his 
experience with that declaration which affirms, that 
repentance and regeneration are the same, he will 
want no arguments to convince him of its fallacy^ 



300 



but will bless God that he has not so learned 
Christ. 

On the doctrine of assurance he will make si- 
milar observations, when he compares his expe- 
rience of it with those declarations of Mr. H. 
which tend to lessen the importance of the bless- 
ing, and to make the attainableness of it dubious 
or equivocal. He will so connect it with the di- 
vine favor, that he will find it impossible to make 
any separation between them in his own experi- 
ence. For though he knows that acceptance, and 
an assurance of it, are not the same, yet he will 
consider the latter as the onlv evidence which the 
scriptures have afforded, by which the former can 
be ascertained; and he will conclude, that while 
destitute of this evidence, he had no reason to 
believe that he w r as in possession of the important 
blessing. He will view the Author of his Salvation 
as the Sun of Righteousness, and consider his ac- 
ceptance as a sacred ray emanating from this 
Fountain of life and light, to enliven aad illumi- 
nate his soul. The warmth and vigour which this 
ray imparts, he will view as the communications 
of grace which reach his heart; and the sensibility 
which they beget by their benign influence, as the 
only evidence by which they can be realised. 
While this ray continues to shine upon him, he 
cannot be destitute of the evidence which it brings; 
and if it cease, his evidence must expire. And 
to retain the fact, when the evidence which ascer- 
tains its existence is done away through the re* 



301 



moval of that ray which alone could keep it alive, 
is at best no better than an unauthorised presump- 
tion, which, instead of discovering faith, argues 
credulity, and betrays enthusiasm. 

Both the plain and the figurative language of 
scripture clearly informs us, that the evidences 
which we have of our acceptance with God, de- 
pend not on the inductions of reason, but on more 
lively sensibilities of which the most illiterate may 
be susceptible. Few, comparatively, can reason 
much, but all can feel much. And while this 
intuitive evidence is retained in an unbroken light, 
no sophistry can beguile its possessor of what he 
enjoys. With these views before us, we may ask 
f where is the wise — where is the scribe — where 
is the disputer of this world I hath not God made 
foolish the wisdom of this world ? Thus hath God 
chosen the foolish things of the world to confound 
the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of 
the world to confound the things which are mighty: 
and base things of the world, and things which are 
despised, hath God chosen; yea, and things which 
are not, to bring to nought things that are, that 
no flesh should glory in his presence." (1 Cor. L 
20. 27, 28, 29.) 

We learn from an authority not to be contro- 
verted, that the Jews under their dispensation, how 
obscurely soever their light might have shined, 
beheld through types and shadows the Saviour of 
the world, whom we behold with open face. They 
** did all eat the same spiritual meat, and did all 



302 



drink the same spiritual drink. For they drank of 
that spiritual rock which followed them ; and that 
rock was Christ." (1 Cor. x. 3, 4.) Our Lord, adopt- 
ing the same metaphor, said, " Verily, Verily, I 
say unto you, except ye eat the flesh of the Son of 
man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. 
Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, 
hath eternal life ; and I will raise him up at the 
last day." (Jclin, vi. 53, 54.) These figurative 
expressions suggest to our minds ideas which can- 
not be detached from intuitive evidence, without 
suffering the most daring violence. And so far as 
they have any analogy to the subject before us, 
they held forth vital Christianity on principles 
which cannot be misunderstood. The comparisons 
before us, imply an appetite, hold out food, and 
lengthen the idea into actual eating. And so far 
as they have any spiritual allusion, we can no 
more gather from them, that the favor of God can 
be possessed without being enjoyed, than that a 
hungry man can eat, be filled, and refreshed, and 
yet remain wholly unconscious that his wants have 
been supplied. 

Not only so, but eating is an action which the 
hungry man must perform ; and, consequently, is 
one of which he can neither be insensible nor un- 
conscious. What man in his senses would affirm, 
that he may eat and be filled, and yet not know- 
it f — Or drink, and yet have no mental discern- 
ment of the fact? Should we admire the under- - 
standing of that Spectator wno would inform him, 



o f\ cr 
OKJO 

when complaining of hunger, that " his stomach 
was already filled with food, and that the present 
demands of his appetite arose from a false sugges- 
tion of nature, misrepresenting to him the reality 
of his situation ?" Would he not justly expose 
himself to ridicule, should he assert, that " appe- 
tite is food, and food appetite, and that it is mad- 
ness in this country to talk of hunger which is not 
connected with supply P And would not such a per- 
son be suspected of having in reality that madness 
which lie attributed to the complainant, should he 
further affirm, that " a man may be supplied with- 
out knowing it ; and that it is impossible that he, 
or any one, can be a subject of genuine hunger, 
and yet be destitute of some grain of nutritive 
food r" And would it not almost provoke our in- 
dignation to hear him aimie in the following 
manner? " Look at your actions; behold, you 
can walk, transact your daily business, and perform 
ail the functions of a healthy man, therefore you 
have eaten and are filled. It is of no consequence 
whether you know the fact of which I assure you, 
or not; you may have food without discerning it, and 
continue to be nourished by it, notwithstanding 
your appetite thus attempts to delude you with a 
false report." Few hungry men, I conceive, would 
think this a satisfactory account of a good dinner, 
or be content to retire with such a nominal meal. 
Their situation would be " even as when a hungry 
man dreameth, and behold he ^eateth; but he 



304 



awaketh, and bis soul is empty : or as wfren a' 
thirsty man dreameth, and behold he drinketh ; but 
be awaketh, and behold he is faint, and his soul 
hath appetite." (Isa. xxix. 8.) 

Nor can the application of these conclusions 
be defeated, by asserting " that the spiritual sup- 
plies, of which our Lord and his Apostle speak, 
belong to those who have made a considerable 
proficiency in the divine life." The words of our 
Lord demolish this miserable subterfuge. He tells us, 
that u unless we eat his flesh and drink his blood, 
we have no life in us. "Are all then, excepting adult 
Christians, destitute of all spiritual life?" If so, 
then spiritual life is not essential to religion : if not, 
must not every one who has this spiritual life, thus 
spiritually feed on him ? And is not this the great 
and distinguishing characteristic by which we may 
know whether we have life or not? And is it pos- 
sible that any man can partake of this blessed 
food, and yet be wholly unconscious of the delici- 
ous repast ? Let those who are watering their 
couch with their tears ; — let those who are mourn- 
ing after an absent God ; — let those who are hun- 
gering and thirsting after righteousness ; — let those 
w ho are groaning for deliverance from their sins ; — 
let those who see men as trees walking;— let those 
who have little faith; and who pray, " Lord, I 
believe, help thou mine unbelief;" — let those whose 
darkness is turned into light;— let those who have 
peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, 



305 



and who feel his love shed abroad in their hearts; 
— or, finally, let common sense answer these 
questions. 

St. Paul, inverting the figure which our Lord 
had used to introduce to our view spiritual life, 
under the representation of " eating his flesh and 
drinking his blood," telis us, that the kingdom of 
God is not meat and drink, but righteousness, and 
peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost." (Rom. xiv. 17.) 
But this inversion of figure has- not led him to an 
inversion of conclusion. It conducts us to the 
same point to which our common Master led us, 
and urges us to seek Christ in us the hope of 
glory. Now, if the kingdom of God consists in 
righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost, it 
will be not only absurd but contradictory, to sup- 
pose that any man can possess this kingdom and 
yet be destitute of that righteousness, peace, and 
joy, in which it consists. And it will not be less 
absurd to imagine, that the favor of God can con- 
sist in any thing which does not include these cha- 
racteristic marks of the Apostolic description. For 
should this be once admitted, it will then follow, 
that St. Paul's account of the kingdom of God 
within us, is not only defective, but erroneous ; 
because, in his definition of this kingdom, he will 
not then have given or included one single feature or 
ingredient which is essential to what he professedly 
defines. But no man who allows the authenticity 
of the scriptures, and the plenary inspiration of 
their authors, will bring against the Apostle so 



306 



foul a charge. When, therefore, these principles 
are granted (and I know not how they T can be 
denied), that righteousness, peace, and joy in the 
Holy Ghost, are included, in a greater or less degree* 
in that kingdom of God which ail who are bora 
of God possess, it will follow with little less than 
demonstrative certainty, that the doctrine which 
asserts, that " a man may have faitii without dis- 
cerning it. and cordially receive Christ and not 
enjoy comfort," must be wrong. 

I have already concluded from the Apostles- 
words, that the kingdom of God cannot be possess- 
ed without giving to its possessors righteousness, 
peace and joy, because these ideas form the essence 
of his description. And this being once gi anted, 
it will be attended with no difficulty to prove, that 
peace and joy cannot inherit a bosom that is un- 
susceptible of their existence. The decisions of 
reason can no more ascertain the existence of peace 
and joy, than the existence of daylight can be 
proved by demonstration. They are blessings 
which must shine by their own light ; and we can 
no more conceive that these can continue when 
their evidences are done away, than that we can 
possess the susceptibility of feeling, and yet be 
insensible of it. Peace and joy are blessings 
which the mind alone is capable of realizing ; and 
the instant they become imperceptible, they cease 
to exist. 

It may, indeed, be said, that " those of whom 
the Apostle speaks are not babes in Christ, but. 



307 



the adult sons of God;" but what advantage is to 
be drawn from this declaration, J am not able to 
discover. If babes in Christ have not this righte- 
ousness, peace, and joy, they cannct possess the 
kingdom of God; because, in the possession of 
those, the possession of this consists. And If they 
have not these blessings, they can produce no title 
to the kingdom, and, consequently, have no pre- 
sent claim on the inheritance. Hence those who 
believe they are in the divine favor, while wholly 
destitute of these sacred evidences which result 
from it, must rest their faith on a sandy foundation, 
and fancy that they actually realize a blessing 
which only lies before them in prospect. 

Our Lord, when conversing w ith Nicodemus on 
the great doctrine of regeneration, described it by 
the analogy of our being born into this world. And 
when the ruler of the Jews inquired, " How can 
these things be," he referred him to the action of 
one of the elements upon his body, for an illustra- 
tion of the truths which he inculcated. " The wind 
bloweth where it listeth, and thou nearest the sound 
thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh and 
whither it goeth ; so is every one that is born of the 
Spirit." (John, iii. 8.) Could Nicodemus possibly 
think that our Lord intended by this figure to in 
form him, that he might know the sound of the 
wind without hearing it, and be convinced that it 
acted upon his body without his feeling it ? Would 
he not, under these circumstances, have repeated his 
objection, and said — " How can these things be ?" 
And if he had asked — " By what means shall I as- 



308 



certain the fact, when these evidences are excluded," 
would not his questidn have been bevond the reach 
of all reasonable reply ? And if our Lord had 
affirmed, that he mi^ht gather the certainty of his 
doctrine and the propriety of his illustration from 
the inductions of reason, would he not have ques- 
tioned his own previous observation — " We know 
that thou art a teacher come from God i" 

The simile by which our Lord illustrated his 
doctrine, was not more appropriate as it applied to 
the subject, than conclusive as it applied to the 
decisiveness of its evidence. No man would wait 
to infer from reason that the wind bloweth where 
it listeth, when he had superior evidence which 
reason can neither strengthen nor destroy. Neither 
will any man be content to receive through me- 
diums, facts which are capable of immediate per- 
ception. The action of the wind brings its own 
evidence w ith it ; and he who is destitute of the 
operative proof which it affords, must remain 
ignorant of its nature. 

To impart a knowledge of sounds to men devoid 
of the sense of hearing, is as impossible as to com- 
municate to one born blind a sensibility of colours. 
Sensitive proof can admit of no substitute or rival. 
But the organ of hearing is not the only thing that 
is necessary to our being acquainted w r ith sounds? 
neither is the organ of vision all that is necessary 
to our discernment of visible objects. . In both 
cases, the organ must be adapted to its purpose, 
paid be brought into contact with the objects, in 
order to h£ of use; and till these objects appear, 



309 



the senses are devoid of exercise. In this view, 
u so is every one that is bom of the Spirit." To these 
characters spiritual organs are given; and on these 
spiritual objects are bestowed ; both are brought 
into union with each other ; and their faculties ex- 
ercise themselves on obj ects, which, being present- 
ed to them, they cordially embrace. 

But the man, who, merely awakened from the 
sleep of spiritual death, is no more than a sincere 
penitent, instead of laying hold on the hope set 
before him, has thus far only the power of hearing 
and seeing restored to him; and while the true 
light, which is the life of the world, remains at a 
distance from him, his utmost ability will only dis- 
cover to his views the horror of his situation. But 
though in this condition— when that light which 
shineth out of darkness visits his soul, and enables 
him to behold the Lamb of God who taketh away 
the sin of the world,, terror will immediately give 
place to love, and thus a new principle of action 
will spring up in his soul. Then he with open face, 
beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, is 
changed into the same image from glory to glory, 
even as by the Spirit of the Lord. (2 Cor. iii. 18.) 

With an earnest desire that this heavenly princi- 
ple may be more generally diffused, till it is imiver- 
-sally experienced ; 

I once more beg leave to subscribe myself, 
Dear Brethren, 
Y ours 

-Affectionately and faithfully, 
T. COKE. 



LETTER VI. 



"VERY DEAR BRETHREN, 

IDlSSATISFIED with Mr. Wesley's defini- 
tion of justifying faith, which he had avowedly 
taken from the homilies of the church of England, 
Mr. Home, though one of her established ministers, 
has introduced another in its stead. He does not, 
indeed,pronounce his new definition to be infallible; 
but such is the complacency with which he views 
it, that he declares he " cannot mend it." I 
will not question his inability ; but must beg leave 
to withhold my assent from what he has adopted, 
and on this ground claim the liberty of stating my 
reasons for denying its propriety. 

Mr. Wesley's definition, the reader will recollect, 
was stated, in my first letter, to be Ci A sure trust 
and confidence that God boih hath and will for- 
give our sins ; and that he hath accepted us again 
into his favor, for the merits of Christ's death and 
passion." This definition, Mr. H. asserts, is both 
absurd and defective ; and one ground of his 



312 



objection is, that u the essential idea contained 
in faith, namely, that it is believing, is neither ex- 
pressed itself, nor implied in any equivalent term." 
(p. 80.) This definition I have already considered, 
and shall feel no objection to re-examine it, when 
it has been proved, " that a sure trust and con- 
fidence" does not include the radical idea of faith. 
The substitute which Mr. H. has given, is re- 
corded in the following words : " The receiving 
the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, as made 
unto us of the Father, wisdom, righteousness, 
sanctification, and redemption, in an humble, 
lowly, penitent, and obedient heart." (p. 83.) 

This devouring definition, which, we are told, 
a will eat up Mr. Wesley's, as easily as the rod of 
Moses, turned into a serpent, swallowed up those 
of Pharaoh's magicians," it may not, however, 
be amiss to examine. Whether Mr. H. may be 
competent or incompetent to the task of mending 
it, I take not upon me to determine ; but that it 
stands very much in need of repair, I hope soon 
to make apparent, because the thing professedly 
defined has no place whatever in the definition. 
, Justifying faith, says Mr. H., is, " the receiving 
6f the Lord Jesus," &x\ That Christ must be 
received into a lowly, penitent, and obedient heart, 
in order to our knowledge of justification, I 
readily allow ; but it will not follow from hence 
that this is a definition of faith. Christ can only be 
received into the heart by faith ; nothing, therefore, 
can be more absurd than to suppose that the act 



313' 



of receiving him, is a definition of the instrument 
by which it is done. The receiving of Christ is a 
proof of the exercise of faith, but not a defini- 
tion of its nature. The exercise presupposes the ex- 
istence of faith, but does not define the nature 
of the thing which is presupposed ; so that the 
receiving of Christ is no more the definition of 
faith, than w r alking is the definition of an animal, 
vt the cutting down of a tree, the definition of 
an axe or a saw* W hatever is presupposed, must 
afford a definition of its nature, if capable of 
one, from the qualities it really possesses, without 
making an appeal cither to the actions of which it 
is capable, the manner in which it is exercised, or 
the effects which it produces* Instead of this, 
Mr, H., in the case before us, has blended exer- 
cise with properties, and defined faith by the 
manner of its operation. 

St. John, in describing the manner of our union 
with Christ, has said—" He came unto his own, 
find his own received him not ; but as many ai 
received him, to them gave he power to become 
the sons of God, even to them that believe on 
his- name." (John, i, 13, 1 ( 2.) What is there in thig 
passage which defines faith, which develops 
its nature—which unfolds any of its inherent 
qualities — or displays any of its constituent parts r 
It. is simply a plain declaration of the manner in 
which believers are united to Christ, of the way 
in which faith must be exercised, and of the 
bksged effects which will follow the believing on 

p 



314 



bis name. And yet, under the imaginary sanction 
which this passage is presumed to give, Mr. H. 
has taken shelter ; and fondly fancies that we 
cannot object to this branch of his definition, 
unless we will quarrel with the beloved disciple. 
This doctrine we shah not hesitate to admit, as 
soon as it shall be made to appear, that the re- 
ceiving of Christ is a definition of the instrument 
by which it is effected. 

But the primary reason, it seems, for which 
this definition is introduced, is to set aside the 
formidable word " sure," which Mr. W. had pre* 
fixed to u trust and confidence ;" for this appears 
to have given him offence. That nothing, which 
bears any resemblance to this naughty word, is 
introduced, Mr. H, not only asserts, but almost 
triumphs in asserting. u If it be said, 6 But in 
this definition there is nothing of assurance/ I 
reply — I did not intend there should be anv thing 
of it." (p. 84.) Now, let us grant that he has 
been successful, and that in giving a definition 
of justifying faith which he " cannot mend/'' every 
idea of assurance is excluded, and that " it has 
no more to do in justification than the feather 
of a goose f (p. 87-) faith in this case must be 
wholly made up of negatives. Confidence, trust, 
and firm reliance, must be entirely rejected ; be- 
cause, if retained or introduced, they will inevita- 
bly include or connect themselves with a greater 
or less degree of assurance : but how a combina- 
tion of negatives can ever obtain the deiiomina- 



315 



ilon of justifying faith, or perform the offices of 
it, I confess myself at a loss to say. That faith 
cannot be wholly made up of negatives is evident 
from the nature of unbelief, it being in itself the 
reverse of faith, and a pure negation of it. Hence' 
then it follows, that faith must exist positively, 
and must be constituted of ingredients which, 
however nominated, must be more or less con- 
nected with assurance. 

If faith be an assent which the mind yields to 
an}' given proposition, when this proposition rs 
supported by evidence, it is clear that no man will 
give his assent, to any given fact until he is con- 
Tinced of its truth ; and this conviction can never 
beget assent until it is strong enough to assure 
him that it is worthy of regard* Now, no man 
can be assured without assurance, nor place genuine 
confidence in any thing which totally excludes 
it in all its variations and degrees. Mr. FT., there- 
fore, has been peculiarly unfortunate, in proportion 
to the success which has attended his definition. 

A faith from which all assurance is excluded 
must be a faith of uncertainty; I had almost said, a 
faith of doubt ; for no medium can easily be 
found between them. And he who is justified by a 
faith of uncertainty, and insecurity, (for that which 
is uncertain, must be insecure,) will find a valua- 
ble acquisition in that doctrine which makes as* 
surance to be the effect of recognition and infer- 
ence. Now, it is certain, that no evidence which 
.ibis faith of uncertainty and insecurity can impart, 



316' 



can bring peace and joy into the soul ; and how 
assurance is to be inferred from the recognition 
of a faith which is in itself uncertain, I have not 
ingenuity enough to discover. If, therefore, the 
internal radical principle be wanting, no outward 
fruits and effects can spring from proper motives* 
or become an unquestionable evidence • of the 
soul's acceptance with God. A faith, therefore, 
which excludes all assurance cannot be that which 
justifies. 

That this faith may be so obscure and invisible, 
as to give unbelief a predominancy in the mind, 
Mr. H. allows ; and indeed it would seem strange 
that he should think otherwise ; but for this he 
finds an excellent palliative. He admits the 
triumph of unbelief, but exonerates the will from 
the turpitude of the action, and resolves the 
whole into ignorance. In fortifying the outposts 
of his definition of that faith which excludes ail 
assurance, Mr. H. supposes a professor of it to 
say—*" Why then had I not peace r" To this he 
answers thus : a because your ignorant unbelief 
leaned to the traditions of men, and not to the 
power and grace of Christ. ( But was not that 
unbelief damnable ?' No, it was the unbelief of 
ignorance, not of will ; for even then you were 
saving— Lord, I believe, help thou my unbelief. I 
laugh at the voluntary humility of the definition 
men. They publish themselves as a set of damned 
sincere penitents." (p. 88.) 

In what manner sififyl unbelief is to be wholly 



317 



detached from ignorance, I clo not know ; it is a 
problem that it is incumbent on Mr. H. to solve; 
for till this be done, the line which divides vice 
from virtue remains undefined. If ignorance be 
supposed to exonerate from guilt, the hypothesis 
which inculcates it sings a syren song, to which 
too many will be inclined to listen who are rest- 
ing short of Christ, in them the hope of glory ; 
and all the lukewarm will seek shelter, and find it, 
under the delusive sound. We ought not, how- 
ever, to forget that ignorance is one of the effects 
of sin ; and to make the sinfulness of sin to be 
abolished by an effect which results from it, is 
a refinement in theology which our forefathers 
never knew. As every one, therefore, may adopt 
this plea, the door is open for all to enter, and 
ignorance becomes an asylum for vice. 

There are few points which Mr. H. has more 
consistently kept in view through the whole series 
of his letters than this, — that the doctrines which 
we inculcate are cruel and severe, reaching in 
many instances almost to diabolical barbarity. 
To set this off in the most odious light, he omits 
no opportunity of recommending the lenity of 
his own system, by exhibiting the extent of that 
mercy which it displays. It is not always, how- 
ever, that he exempts himself from the charges 
which he is so forward to bring against others. I 
could easily recriminate, were I disposed to re- 
turn the unhandsome language which he has 
used \ but I forbear. Of this fact, the following 



318 



passage will furnish us with a striking* example : 
? But as St. Paul asserts, we receive the Spirit 
by faith; and as we should not know whether 
there were any Holy Ghost but by the scriptures ; 
so I affirm, that no man ever received the Spirit 
until he had previously staked his soul on the 
testimony of the written word. This, brethren, 
is a weak place in Methodism." (p. 93.) What 
now is become of all those who had not, and 
>vho have not, the written word ? If " no man 
.ever received the Spirit until he had previously 
staked his soul on the testimony of the written 
word/* it is easy to anticipate the consequences 
to which this principle must lead. If the doctrine 
thus stated be true, then all who have not been 
favored with the written word must have perished 
everlastingly. Yea, all pious Heathens, through 
every age, must have lived and died without hope, 
and \wthout God in the world. Few, very lew 
indeed, can be saved, if this principle be true. 

If Mr, H. will repel these conclusions, he must 
have recourse to the various dispensations of the 
gospel ; — those dispensations which Mr. Fletcher 
defended, which Mr. Wesley acknowledged, and 
which I have pointed out in a preceding letter. 
His appeal to these dispensations I most readily 
admit ; but in case he avail himself of them, I 
demand, on the same ground, the same right for 
Mr. Wesley and Mr. Fletcher; — a right which 
I have shewn they claimed for themselves, though 
Mr. H. has insinuated^ that " it is a palpable un^ 



310 



truth." (p. 79.) In case he avail himself of the 
dispensations, then we stand exempt from the 
charges of dereliction which are brought against 
us, and nearly one half of his publication falls to. 
the ground ; but if, on the contrary, he refuse to 
take shelter under the dispensations, he stands 
charged with the above conclusions, which con- 
sign to eternal miserv almost the whole of the 
human race* 

To counterbalance the preceding weight which 
he had inadvertently thrown into the scale of seve- 
rity, Mr. H. profusely pours his lenitives on the 
dying bed: " I do verily believe, (says he) that 
whosoever dieth crying, God be merciful to me a 
sinner, (provided he say it with true repentance, 
on which I conceive not myself called to pass a 
judgment, but to leave him with God who seeth 
his heart,) shall be saved." (p. 108.) Though 
this is certainly carrying lenity to a great length, 
yet T feel less disposed to controvert the position, 
than to animadvert on the consequences to which, 
on Mr. H/s principles, it is calculated to lead. 
It certainly has the appearance of tendency to 
encourage the profligate to postpone their repent- 
ance to a dying hour, from a full assurance that 
galvation awaits them there. Lenity, undoubtedly, 
is commendable ; but there are certain boundaries 
beyond which it cannot pass, without degenerat- 
ing into indifference about distinctions between 
truth and error. Nothing can be farther from my 
intention than to impute to Mr. H. any such 



320 



design. But it is to be feared, that men of cor- 
rupt minds, availing themselves of an expression 
which describes mercy in its utmost extreme, will 
convert it into a general principle, and infer from 
it consequences which we shudder to behold. 

Among the various doctrines which we inculcate, 
on which Mr. H. has chosen to animadvert, and to 
load with opprobrious epithets, there is one Article 
which excites his attention in a peculiar manner; 
and tiiis is the inward evidence of acceptance which 
we urge every sincere penitent to seek. This in- 
ward evidence, we view as nothing more nor less 
than God's manifestation of the Spirit of adoption, 
which is promised to believers, and revealed in* 
their hearts. To display this doctrine in such & 
light that our presumption may be manifest, and 
our arrogance apparent, he has availed himself of 
all suitable occasions, and some unsuitable ones, 
to represent the Spirit of adoption as inapplicable 
to those whom we earnestly press to. seek it, and 
the a direct witness 15 of this Spirit as wholly un- 
attainable by all. To place this subject in a dis* 
torted point of view, in order that it might furnish 
him with inferences which would operate to our 
disadvantage, he has exhibited this branch of our 
creed under very improper colouring. 

The light in which Mr. H. views a direct witness 
of the Spirit, and represents us as viewing it, may 
easily be gathered from the following passages : 
" Do you, can you, believe, that the new-born 
babes of Methodism have all clear and explicit 



321 



faitli in Christ, and fix immediately on his glorious 
atonement; that the Spirit of adoption, which 
Jesus gave to his immediate disciples, as the seal 
of adult sonship, is immediately shed abroad in 
their infant hearts : that, as co-heirs with their 
Lord, they immediately drink the generous wine 
of the kingdom, and rejoice in hope of the glory 
to be revealed, with joy full of glory ? And to all 
this, do you add a direct witness, an inward im- 
pression, a voice of God, known by its own god- 
like and infallible evidence, testifying — -thou art 
pardoned — thou hast redemption in his blood ! 
(p. 39.) " The misfortune is, you give them no 
just idea of justifying faith— preach up assurance 
for faith, and clog the doctrine by asserting, not 
only that it is accompanied by the Spirit of adop- 
tion, but has also a direct witness, Thou art par- 
doned, thou hast redemption in his blood." (p. 99.) 
" The Spirit of adoption is so frequently spoken 
of, that to deny it we must deny the scriptures. 
The direct witness, as described by Mr. Wesley, 
has no place in scripture, nor, as far as I know, is 
it asserted by any but the Methodists." (p. 114.) 
? I deny there is any direct witness. The scrip- 
tures nowhere affirm it, and I dare not be wise 
above what is written" (p. 113.) " The testimony 
borne by the direct witness, under whatever form 
of words it is expressed, is substantially this, 
Thou art a child of God. It is then an internal 
voice, or certain words applied to the mind, and 
supposed to be spoken directly by the Holy Ghost, 
p 0 



322 



of which, though no criteria can he given, yet it 
is said to be accompanied with indubitable evi- 
dence." (p. 114.) From these passages, and from 
a variety of others, it is evident that Mr. H. admits 
the Spirit of adoption to be the privilege of adult 
Christians, but totally denies a direct witness. 
" He that looks and prays (he observes) for a 
direct witness, asks for wiiat is neither promised 
nor defined ; which they Who assert, cannot de- 
scribe ; and which is utterly unnecessary to holiness 
and consolation : for adoption is sealed by filial 
love and confidence." (p. 1 J 3.) 

That the Spirit of adoption, and the witness of 
the Spirit, are clearly promised in scripture, is 
evident from the following passage : " For ye 
have not received the Spirit of bondage again to 
fear, but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, 
whereby we cry, Abba, Father. The Spirit itself 
beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the 
children of God." (Rom. viii. 15, 16.) Such is- 
the plain and undeniable language of scripture : 
but whether this witness be direct or indirect ;-— 
whether, like faith, it is to be known by intuition 
or inference, is the important question which re- 
mains to be decided. 

Mr. Home affirms, that " no direct witness b 
promised in scripture," and on this account he 
withholds his assent. As to the epithet direct, I 
allow the fact, but deny that this is any reason for 
refusing assent, and assert that neither is an indi- 
rect witness promised, as far as it relates to the 



323 



mere epithet indirect. If, therefore, the silence 
of scripture can be pleaded as the foundation of 
an argument in the former case, it must be admit- 
ted to be equally forcible in the latter ; and then 
the result will be, that there can be no witness of 
the Spirit either direct or indirect. For if he has 
a right to deny a direct witness, because the scrip- 
tures nowhere assert it under the mere epithet direct, 
I have an equal right to deny an indirect witness 
on the same ground. Our claims are equal, and 
they must'stand or fall together. 

That a witness of the Spirit is promised in the 
Gospel, is a position which no more requires proof 
than it admits of denial. On this point the scrip* 
tures are decisive ; and he who allows their autho- 
rity, cannot rationally dispute the fact. But to 
obtain an adequate knowledge of its nature, we 
must experience it in our hearts; and to judge 
whether it be direct or indirect, we must repair to 
the subject itself ; and, considering it in connec- 
tion with its effects and consequences, abide by 
the evidences which shall appear. But, first, it 
may be necessary to state what we mean by the 
term. 

By " a direct witness" we do not mean, as Miv 
H. has insinuated, another Spirit distinct from the 
Spirit of adoption ; neither do we mean another 
evidence distinct from that which the Spirit of 
adoption bears. We have no more conception 
that there are tw r o such witnesses, than that there 
are two distinct Spirits;, or, that there are two 



324 



Spirits, than that there are two Gods. We vietf 
this " direct witness'' as nothing more than the 
primary testimony which the Spirit of adoption 
bears, imparting to us an assurance, with a greater 
or less degree of evidence, that we are born of 
God, and have passed from death unto life. 

When God justifies an awakened sinner, he 
does it by an act of mercy for the sake of Jesus 
Christ. Immediately when justification takes 
place, our views are, that God sends forth the 
Spirit of his Son into the pardoned heart as the 
Spirit of adoption ; and the evidence which this 
Spirit bears to ours that we are accepted through 
the Beloved, is the only direct witness which we 
know, or for which we contend. But this I hope 
more fully to express hereafter. 

From this brief statement, it is evident that we 
do not make the witness of the Spirit to be a dis- 
tinct being from the Spirit himself, but only an 
evidence of his being present, and of what he has 
done, and this testimony which he bears is that 
which constitutes the direct witness. Still, how- 
ever, the ideas are distinct. For though there 
can be no testimony without a testifier— -no act 
without an actor, yet the testifier and the evidence 
which he bears, can never be so blended together 
as to abolish all distinctions between them. But 
when we stand charged (as Mr. H. has charged 
us, p. 118.) with asserting, that, independently 
of an assurance of the remission of sins, we seek 
for another direct witness, we view ourselves ei.tueF 



325 

-as undesignedly misrepresented by those who know 
not whereof they affirm, or slanderously traduced 
by men who wilfully vilify our doctrines. 

An indirect witness can only operate indirectly 
through some medium; it is this circumstance 
which makes it indirect. Now,, there can be no 
medium but that of the sacred writings ; and the 
fatal consequences which will ensue, when t^ie 
Spirit's operations are confined exclusively to the 
written word, I have already pointed out. An in- 
direct witness can never impart any positive testi- 
mony, and, consequently, can never produce any 
positive conviction of a fact. And the mind which 
always remains destitute of positive conviction, 
must always remain destitute of assurance. 

As Mr. H. positively denies " that there is any di- 
rect witness," no witness but that which is indirect 
can remain, or be recognised by him. And how 
the recognition of that which imparts only an in- 
direct witness can beget assurance, is a paradox 
which I cannot unravel. That the indirect witness 
which he acknowledges, operates through the 
medium which I have pointed out, is evident fronv 
his own declaration. In reply to the following 
question—" How, or in what manner is the divine 
testimony manifested ?" he answers, " By the love 
of God shed abroad in the heart/' This is that 
for which we contend : but he explains — " If I 
am pressed- — How does the Spirit of God shed it 
abroad ? I answer again, by enlightening the eyes 



326 



of my understanding, to discern the abundant 
love of God revealed to me in the word ; and this 
love of God cordially believed, makes me abun- 
dantly to love God. If the objector still presses 
me, by asking, How does the Spirit operate on 
your mind to discern that in scripture which you 
never saw before ? I answer, that it is what the 
scripture hath not revealed, which I probably 
could not understand if it had, and which I pre- 
sume not to investigate, as being in its nature, I 
conceive, incomprehensible." (p. 124.) In this 
passage Mr. EL brings himself to that very point 
in which a direct witness becomes necessary, — not 
to reveal the mode of operation, but to excite our: 
love, and give us a clear discernment of God's re- 
conciled favor. But rather than admit its exist- 
ence, he takes shelter under the canopy of a pro- 
fessed inability to comprehend what no one takes 
upon him to explain ; thus artfully evading the 
question which he durst not meet. He has started 
an objection which he cannot answer. He has 
met a lion in the way; and retreats with precipi- 
tation from the sight of that direct witness which 
he denies. 

The Apostle Paul prayed, that we might " be 
strengthened with might by his Spirit in the inner 
man, that Christ (not a discernment of his word) 
might dwell in our hearts by faith." (Eph. iii. ]6, 
17.) He declares also, that we H are not in the flesh 
tut in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God 



327 



dwell in us." (Rom. viii. Q.) " That we shall be 
quickened by bis Spirit that dwelleth in us." (Rom, 
viii. 11,) and, that " the Spirit of God dwelleth 
in us." (1 Cor. iii. 16.) St. John has said, " he 
that keepeth his commandments, dwelleth in him, 
and he in him." (I John, iv. 12.) that " he that 
dwelleth in love, dwelleth in God, and God in 
him;" (v. 16.) and that " whosoever shall confess 
that Jesus is the Son of Gocl, God dwelleth in him > 
and he in God." I John, iv. 15.) And to prevent 
all mistakes, we are assured, that " no man can 
call Jesus Lord, but by the Holy Ghost." (1 Cor. 
xii. 8.) Nor has bur Lord himself omitted to tes- 
tify the same important truth. His declarations 
are, "He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my 
blood, dwelleth in me, and [ in him." (John, vu 
^55.) " And I will pray the Father, and he shall 
give you another Comforter, that he may abide 
with you for ever ; even the Spirit of truth, whom 
the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, 
neither knoweth him ; but ye know him ; for he 
dwelleth with you, and shall be in you." (John, T 
xiv. 16, 17.) No words within the compass of 
language can be more forcible than those I have 
adduced, to declare the certainty of the real in- 
dwelling God within every believing heart. But 
if the doctrine of Mr. H. be true r that the Spirit 
bears witness only by his fruits, and these fruits 
result from my being enabled to discern the abun- 
dant love of God revealed in his word, the Spirit 
himself is supplanted by the testimony which the 



328 



scriptures bear of him ; and the only thing which 
primarily dwells in our hearts, is a cordial belief 
of the truth of the written record. Here then 
Mr. H. is fairly at issue with St. Paul, St. John, 
and our Lord himself ; and those who advert to 
the respective authorities before them, will find no 
difficulty in forming their decisions in favor of 
truth. 

That the Spirit himself, and not the record 
which the scriptures bear of him, dwells in the 
believing heart, is too plainly expressed in tha 
passages above quoted, to be called into question ; 
and from the manner of his residence, the nature 
of the evidence which he brings may be fairly 
inferred. Is it reasonable to suppose that the 
Holy Spirit would take up his abode in our hearts, 
and yet refer us to the written word for our pri- 
mary evidence of his inward residence? Will he 
conceal those beams which always shine by innate 
lustre, that he may manifest himself to us through 
a medium, which, without his light, is but a dead 
letter ? Will the Sun of righteousness shine, and 
rise on our hearts, and yet direct us to behold his 
glory reflected from a mirror ? The natural sun 
shining in meridian splendour affords intuitive 
evidence of his refulgence ; and it is ridiculous for 
us to hunt through the mazes of philosophy for a 
knowledge of his power, when we see his light, 
and feel his invigorating warmth. And analogy 
says, that it is not less absurd for us to suppose 
that the Holy Spirit will take up his abode within 



329 



us, and yet withheld his intuitive evidence, Vv r hich 
all can understand, because all can feel; and direct 
us, for our primary knowledge of the light which 
he imparts, to the sacred records, which some wrest 
to their awn destruction. The man who can 
think this, must entertain very degrading* views of 
that light which shineth upon his heart ; and he 
who thinks otherwise, must admit the direct wit- 
ness for which we contend. 

But while Mr. H. denies a direct witness, he ad- 
mits the Spirit of adoption, and by so doing allows 
that evidence which he positively rejects. " The 
Spirit of adoption (says he) fills every faculty 
(p. 111.) Now, if the Spirit of adoption fills every 
faculty, he must take up his residence in our 
bosoms, and must beai>that direct testimony which 
we assert. Nothing can fill every faculty, and 
yet afford no direct testimony of the fact : it will 
amount to little less than a contradiction to sur> 
pose it. In short, whatever occupies every faculty, 
must fill that very station which a direct witness is 
supposed to engross, and, consequently,by so doing, 
become that very thing which it is presumed to 
supersede. 

Mr. H. positively denies that there is any direct 
witness ; but on what solid ground his denial is 
founded, it would be difficult indeed to say. Is he 
a master of universal truth ? if not, this which he 
denies, may be one with which he is tujacquaint-" 
ed« Does he know every possible mode of evi- 
dence which infinity can communicate ? if not, 



330 



this may be one to which he is a stranger. Is he 
acquainted with all the varieties which infinite 
love can display ? if not, this may be an instance 
whrch has not vet reached him. Is his intellect 
capable of grasping infinite goodness, wisdom, and 
merev r if not. such a direct witness mav be im- 
parted. Has he analysed every portion of holy 
writ ; — explored the causes, perceived the import, 
and anticipated the consequences, of every ex- 
pression i if not, a direct witness may be among 
those truths which lie concealed to him. Is he in- 
timately acquainted with the actual experience of 
every Christian; if not^ that experience with which 
he is unacquainted, may include a direct wdtness. 
Is he sure that to impart a direct w itness is hostile 
to the Divine nature ? if not, then he mav have 
imparted it. Is he certain that it is denied in any 
part of the bible ? if not, then it may yet be there, 
though undiscovered by him. Is he certain that 
such a witness is irreconcilable with the divine 
perfections, and the grand scheme of redemption ? 
if not, it may be congenial with the former, and 
constitute a part of the latter. Is he sure that 
God cannot impart it ? if not, then he may have 
done it. Has he reached the heights and depths 
of all possible experience ? if not, it may yet 
await him, and he may yet be benefited by it. 
In short, if he do not know every species of evi- 
dence within the reach of possibility, — every form 
which infinite benevolence has assumed, — and every 
thing which it either has ; or has not done ; he can* 



331 



iiot know that there is no such thing as a direct 
witness of the Spirit, An ability to answer all 
these questions, and many more, is necessary, to 
the denial which he has made. And yet, without 
possessing a single qualification to answer any of 
them, he has assumed the ground on which no 
finite being dares to stand, and boldly asserted, 
"I deny there is any direct witness." (p. 113.) 

We know nothing of any witness, either direct 
or indirect, which stands opposed to the written 
word, — which tends to lessen its authority, or 
which shrinks from an appeal to its glorious sanc- 
tions, either by evasions or defiance. The sacred 
word is our ultimate rule of faith and practice ; 
and whatever directs our views into another chan- 
nel, we know, from this circumstance, to be the 
voice of a stranger, which we ought not to follow. 
It is by this rule that we try the spirits, and re- 
ceive that Spirit alone which brings with it those 
testimonials that it belongs to God, which are 
contained in the written word. 

But while we contend for this ultimate appeal, 
we do not deny that inward testimony of our 
adoption, through .which the scriptures have 
assured us we may know that we have passed 
from death unto life. Indeed, no spirit could be 
tried by the wTitten word, unless it manifested 
some inward evidence of its existence and opera- 
tion on our hearts, antecedently to this appeal. The 
evidence, therefore, of any spirit operating on our 
hearts, which is brought to this sacred touchstone^ 



332 



must, by referring to this decision, be known by 
some previous manifestation ; and, consequently, 
the testimony tvllicli it brings, whether true or 
false, must be direct. Christ in ns the hope of 
glory, we seek not in the scriptures, but r as direct- 
ed by them, in our hearts ; and wait for an in- 
ward manifestation of his love, that we may know 
we are bom of God. 

That the love of God to us, shed abroad in 
the heart, is the privilege of the adult sons of 
God, Mr. H. will probably allow. If then the 
fact be granted, it would seem absurd to deny 
its cause ; for no effect can be without a cause 
which is adequate to its production. To this 
office nothing can be assigned in the present in- 
stance, but the Spirit of God, or the Holy Ghost 
given unto us. It would not be less absurd to 
admit both cause and effect to exist, and yet to 
deny the evidence by which their relation to each 
other is known, and by which the fact itself is 
fully ascertained. No fact can be adopted, unless 
we previously admit its evidence; and no evidence 
*can be known as such, unless it reach the percep- 
tive powers of those to whom it is evidence. 

Nov/, should Mr. H. contend, that this commu- 
nication is made by the " enlightening of our 
understandings through the Spirit," &c. then this 
act of enlighten in £ will become a direct witness 
of his saving operation. Should he assert, that 
it is " by enabling me to discern the abundant 
love of God/' &c. then this light by which Ikn-orc 



333 



I have ability to discern, will bear a direct test - 
mony in behalf of that Spirit from whence it 
sprang, and of that fact which is thus attested. If 
the motives from whence I act are changed, then 
my evidence of this change must be known, and 
will bear a direct testimony in favor of the cause 
which produced it. Jn short, every striving, every 
operation, every manifestation of God to the heart, 
bears a direct witness to the presence and activity 
of the agent, as well as in favor of the effects 
produced. 

Now, if God reveal himself to us, either ia 
his word, or by enlightening our understandings, 
or by any other mode of his gracious dealings, it 
must be through his Spirit. For as there is no 
saving knowledge of the Father but by the Son, 
so there is no knowledge of the Son but by the 
Spirit. (Matt. xi. £7.) No man, St. Paul affirms, 
can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy 
Ghost. (1. Cor. xii. 3.) These important posi- 
tions are amplified by the same Apostle, in another 
place, into a powerful argument, which he thus 
-states : " What man knoweth the things of a 
man, save the spirit of man which is in him ? 
even so the things of God knoweth no man, but 
the Spirit of God. Now, we have received, not 
jthe spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is of 
God, that we might know the things, that are freely 
given to us of God." (1 Cor. ii. 11, 12.) 

The foundation of this argument is laid in a 
position which suits the capacities of all, and finds 



334 



h mirror in every man's experience and know- 
ledge. It runs .thus — "What man knoweth the 
things of a man, save the spirit of man which is 
in him ?" To this plain question every one must 
reply, that u nothing hut the spirit of a man can 
enable him to understand the things of a man." 
And when this answer is admitted, it must follow, 
that the inward principle by which we discern 
and know the things of a man, must so shine 
upon our understandings by its native lustre, as 
io bring the fact perceived into union with our 
spirits, and by so doing, afford us a direct witness 
of those truths which are perceived and under- 
Stood. 

Wherever the things of a man are known by 
the spirit of a man, that spirit must afford a direct 
testimony of its own existence ; for without this 
it must actually want that authority which it is 
presumed to impart ; and by wanting that authority 
or evidence upon which our knowledge of its ex- 
istence rests, it can never become a witness of 
those things which are presumed to be known by 
its testimony. But since the things of a man are 
thus known, and known by the spirit that is in 
man, the union itself, which is formed between 
the fact and the spirit, must be recognised by a 
Witness which the spirit brings ; which witness, 
bv making us acquainted with facts that were 
before unknown, must reach our minds antece- 
dentlv to them, and therefore be direct. 

In transferring the argument to divine things, 



4 



335 



the analogy must hold good ; for without this the 
simile will be deprived of its intended meaning. 
Let the analogy be destroyed, and the whole pas- 
sage can serve no purpose but that of delusion, 
by leading us into an error from which we can 
find no means of extricating ourselves. But as 
such an imputation can never be thrown on the 
Apostle, who wrote by the plenary inspiration 
of the Holy Spirit, the conclusion is inevitable, 
and a direct witness becomes recognised by our 
admitting the cause of our knowledge, and the 
facts which are ascertained. 

But it is not merely by implication and inference 
that the argument is made good. The plain and 
positive declaration of the Apostle enforces both 
the premises and conclusion in the most unequi- 
vocal manner. For, after having told us that 
u no man knoweth the things of a man, save the 
spirit of man which is in him," he carries on the 
observation to illustrate the subject of which he 
spoke : " Even so the things of God knoweth no 
man, but the Spirit of God." Here, then, is a 
plain testimony that the things of God are only 
known by the Spirit of God. Now, if it be only 
through the Spirit that we know • the things of 
God, it clearly follows, that the witness of the 
Spirit, through which they are known, cannot be 
concealed. It would be the greatest absurdity to 
assert, that we admitted the Spirit to bear testi- 
mony to the things of God, while we denied the 
testimony which it brought, and supposed that it 



336 



afforded no evidence of its own existence, except* 
through those very facts which we receive by its 
witness. 

I cannot receive the testimony of any testi- 
fier, unless I am first satisfied that the testifier ex- 
ists ; neither can I admit the facts which any 
testifier reveals, unless I first admit his evidence. 
The writing must always be believed, before the 
thins: witnessed by it can be received ; because tes- 
timony is that upon which my receiving of the 
thing testified is invariably dependent. I may 
know whether the testimony given be true or 
false by referring it to some infallible standard of 
truth, namely, by weighing it (in the present 
case) in the balance of the sanctuary ; but the 
testimony must first be given before it can be 
perceived, and first be recognised as an evidence 
before it can be weighed. Now, as the standard 
presupposes the testimony of which it proves the 
tratb, so the testimony presupposes the testifier ; 
but the existence both of the testifier and his 
testimony must rest on a witness that is direct, 
because that witness is prior to, and distinct from, 
the standard to which we ultimately refer, when 
we attempt to investigate and ascertain its 
nature. 

That this Spirit of God is imparted to us u that 
we might know the things which are freely riven 
to us of God," is the plain .Apostolic account. 
But if the testifier himself, by whom the things 
given to us of God are known, lies concealed, 



337 

knd affords no direct evidence of his existence in 
the heart, he withholds his testimony, and there- 
fore cannot impart that knowledge of given truths 
which I am supposed to receive through his agen- 
cy. If, by this Spirit, I know the things freely 
given to me of God, he must afford a direct wit- 
ness of his existence b} T the evidence which he 
.communicates : but if he do not give me to know 
these things, then he is not that Spirit which the 
Apostle describes. If this Spirit be concealed, bfc 
cannot give me to know the things of God \ 
but if he be not concealed, he must be known 
by his own light, because whatever is revealed to 
us, is revealed by the Spirit. If, then, the Spirit 
be known, he must be known by the Spirit ; and 
that which is known by itself, must be known by 
its own light; and that which shines by its own 
light, must bring with it an evidence or witness 
w hich is direct. As } therefore, the spirit of a maif, 
by which human things are known, must afford 
.a direct evidence of their existence, even so the 
Spirit of God, by which divine, things are known, 
must afford a direct witness of their existence 
also. That the former is true, is assumed by the 
Apostle as a truth sufficiently evident to become 
the basis of his argument ; and that the latter is 
certain, appears from the " even so" with which 
ire applies the illustration. 

But the argument does not terminate here. Tt 
assumes the question on a more extensive seaie. 
•The spirit of % man is essentially necessary t$ 



338 



know the things of a man. No inferior capa- 
cities are equal to it, no instinctive powers can 
reach it, no animal sagacity is adequate to the 
purpose ; nothing less than the spirit of a man is 
equal to the things of a man : " Even so,' r no 
human understanding, no exertions of reasoning, 
no refinements of education, no philosophical re- 
searches, are equal to the things of God. These 
are placed where nothing but the Spirit of God can 
reach them. As, therefore, nothing less than the 
human intellect is equal to the comprehension of 
human things, so nothing but the Spirit of God 
is equal to the comprehension of the things freely 
given to us of God. 

Now, as the things of God are of a spiritua 
nature, they can only be known by a spiritu 
power. And as this spiritual power is not the 
offspring of the human understanding, it can be 
raised in the soul only by the Spirit of him wh 
hath begotten us again to a lively hope throug 
the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Hence the Apos 
tie argues, that " the natural man knoweth no 
the things of God, because they are spirituall 
discerned." A spiritual being operating, and 
spiritual power raised, imply a spiritual communi 
cation, whatever may be the instrument of con 
veyance ; and where the agent, the power, and th 
communication, are recognised as spiritual, ther 
we must admit a spiritual and direct witness of th 
facts attested. 

If a spiritual power make spiritual communica 



339- 

tions without bringing with it a spiritual evidence 
it must act contrary to its nature ; and to suppose 
it to bring with it that which is spiritual, is to 
admit that which is intuitive ; and that which is 
intuitive must be direct. To admit a spiritual 
power to operate as such, while we disclaim a spiri- 
tual evidence, is to assert the fact, and deny the 
only evidence which can prove it to be what we 
affirm. On the contrary, to aliow the evidence 
df these facts, as well as the facts themselves^ to 
be spiritual, is to admit a witness which operates 
immediately on the soul, and that which oper- 
ates immediately must be direct. 

" No man (the Apostle says) can say that Jestfss 
is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost." ( 1 Cor. : h„ 
$,) Now, no man can adopt this truth, unless he 
knows ,it; and no man can know it, but by tfee 
Holy Ghost ; and no man can know it by the 
Holy Ghost, but by a spiritual evidence ; and no 
man can have a spiritual evidence uuless it be 
direct. Of these connective propositions the 
proofs may be easily adduced. The first is plain 
scripture, and needs neither explanation nor de- 
fence. Secondly, if we affirm that Jesus is the 
Lord, while we know nothing of the feet we aniim, 
we become false witnesses by attesting that to be 
a fact which to us is a falsehood* The third is 
founded on sacred authority, " the things of God 
kooweth no man, but the Spirit of God." (1 Cor. 
ii. ] 1.) The fourth proposition arises from the 
active energy of the agent. Nothing can open 



340 



in the mind spiritual perceptions but a spiritual 
power; and the existence of spiritual perceptions 
becomes an evidence to prove the spiritual opera*, 
tion of this power. That this evidence must reach 
the soul is clear, for its existence cannot be as- 
certained w ithout it. And to contend, that I have 
a spiritual evidence of my adoption, while I deny 
that it is direct, is once more to assert the fact, 
and deny the only witness by which it can be 
known. Here then the conclusion once more 
returns upon us. That which is spiritually known, 
must be known by a spiritual witness ; and that 
by which it is known, must be direct, 

As divine revelation was first given by the Spirit, 
-so a communication or an unfolding; of this re- 
velation can only be by the same Spirit. That 
the first proposition is true, is evident from the 
express declaration of scripture : u For prophecy 
came not in old time by the will of man; 
but holy men of God spake as they were moved 
by the Holy Ghost." (2 Pet. i. 2L) And that the 
second is true, rests on the same authority ; " for 
the letter killeth, but the Spirit giveth life ; (2 Cor. 
iii. 6.) and the reason is, " that we should serve in 
newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the 
letter." (Rom. vii. 6.) From these passages it is 
evident, that both revelation, and the spiritual 
disclosure of it, are by the Spirit, and by this 
alone. 

Now, it is impossible that the Spirit can make 
an application of the written word to any thing 



311 



but our souls, because these are to be raised into 
newness of life — these are to be quickened, 
—these are the objects of the Spirit's agency. And 
it is equally impossible to allow this fact, and yet 
suppose that the Spirit has no direct witness, 
when we admit that he so operates on our hearts as 
to make an application of the written record. 
Such a supposition can only be heightened by the 
absurdity of imagining that we only know him 
indirectly, by viewing him through that very me- 
dium which must remain a dead letter, till he 
brings it home with power to our souls. The dis- 
tance between our unquickened souls and God's 
revealed wall, proves the necessity of some in- 
tervening power to bring them together ; and the 
commandment being personally applied, proves 
the acturd intervention of the Spirit. Now that 
which intervenes between the holy word which 
records the promises, and our souls, to bring them 
into union, must operate without a medium, and 
that which operates without a medium must afford 
an evidence that is direct. 

Admitting the sacred writings to be a medium 
through which God communicates his promises, 
and displays the riches of his grace; yet it is evi- 
dent that something is still w r anting to bring us 
nigh by the Blood of sprinkling. This the holy 
scriptures themselves have pointed out, namely, 
the Holy Spirit, which leads into all truth. Now 
that which applies any medium to our hearts, must 
needs approach nearer to our hearts than that 
medium which it applies; and, consequently, cm 



never be restricted in its operations by that me- 
dium beyond which it extends, and which it con- 
fessedly brings home to oar souls. From these 
premises the conclusion in favor of a direct wit- 
ness is obvious. That agent which applies a me- 
dium, must necessarily have an action indepen- 
dently of it ; and that w hich thus acts, must af- 
ford a testimony which is direct. 

St. Paul asserts, that " the Spirit of God is 
within us." He does not in this place say the 
fruits of the Spirit, nor the records of the Spirit, 
but the Spirit itself; " and we have no right to 
be wise above w r hat is written," or to introduce 
ideas which the Holy Ghost saw proper to omit. 
Nov/, if the Spirit of God be within us, he cannot 
be within us bya medium.Whatever is made a medi- 
um of communication,must be supposed to be nearer 
to us than that aeent which acts through it. Thus 
much the term itself imports; for without this itceases 
to be a medium. Hence, then, it is impossible that 
the scrip! ures can be a medium in the case before i/s > 
because these are without us, but the Spirit of God 
is within us ; and that which is known to exist with- 
in us by experience, without reaching us through 
a medium, must have a witness which is direct. 

The Apostle informs us, that " as soon as 
Christ was revealed in him, he conferred not 
with flesh and blood." (Gab i, 16.) Can it be 
supposed that this revelation was made to him 
through a medium I or that, though Christ was 
revealed in his heart, he bore no direct witness 
of liis appearance ? Now Christ is the same yes- 



343 

ferday, to-day, and for ever. (Heb, xiii. 8.) in all 
his ordinary manifestations. If, therefore, before 
the sacred records were committed to writing, he 
illuminated the saints of old by and through his 
Spirit, we have no reason to think his arm is 
shortened, or his ear heavy. His power is the 
same ; his ordinary workings are tlie same ; and 
whenever his spiritual residence is in the heart, the 
evidence of his presence must be direct. 

Our Lord, when about to take his leave of his 
disciples, who, overwhelmed with sorrow, were 
inconsolable for their approaching loss, soothed 
the anguish of their hearts with the following 
promise : " And I will pray the Father, and he 
shall give you another Comforter, that he may 
abide with you for ever." (John, xiv. 16.) No 
man can reasonably suppose, on perusing this 
passage, that our Lord designed only to console 
them with a promise, that his words should be 
fulfilled to them through the scriptures, or that 
they so understood him. Neither can we imagine 
that it was his intention to direct those who should 
succeed them in the lapse of afterages till the end 
of time, to view this Comforter onlv through the " 
medium of revelation. To prevent such an in- 
terpretation, the following verse imparts its light ; 
" Even the Spirit of truth, whom the world can- 
not receive, because it seeth him not, neither 
knoweth him ; but ye know him ; for he dwelleth 
with you, and shall be in you." Now that which 
dwelleth in if it speak through a medium, 



344 

can only speak through one which is nearer to «'s 
than itself; but such a medium cannot be found : 
its evidence, therefore, must be direct. Our Lord 
says, (i he shall be in you." Whatever is within 
Us, as it can admit of nothing nearer, must either 
shine by its own light, or not shine at all. That 
the Spi it does shine, is evident ; because he 
brings all things to our remembrance, teaches us 
all things, and guides into all truth. (John, xiv. 
126". Sc xvi. 13.) Hence then the immediate conse- 
quence is, that he both resides within us, and 
•shines by his own lustre. 

Saint John has said, " We know that he abid- 
eth in us, by the Spirit Which he hath given us." 
(i John, iii. C4.) Can this inward residence of the 
indwelling God (I Would ask) be known, and 
known by the Spirit which is given to us, if Nei- 
ther the termer nor the latter had any direct wit- 
ness ? Can any agent evidence to me an important 
fact, when that agent can no more be known to 
exist than the fact which he witnesses? Can ! re- 
ceive the testimony of a witness, when that wit- 
ness wants another to certify his existence? Or 
can the testimony of this testifier be known, when 
he can only be proved to exist by something which 
is indirect ? Who does not perceive rhat a man 
must first renounce his understanding, before he 
can receive such an inversion of thought and 
order : Analogv, reason, and common sense, unite 
in declaring in favor of a direct witness. 

An indirect testifier may bear an indirect testis 



345 



inonv; but it can do nothing more, because no- 
thing can communicate what it does not possess ? 
the supposition would compel us to allow, that It 
could communicate such a testimony, and not 
communicate it, at the same time. A direct testi- 
mony from an indirect testifier, therefore, cannot 
be obtained, But while nothing but an indirect 
testimony appears, it is impossible that positive 
knowledge can be procured by it. Positive know- 
ledge can only arise from positive testimony ; 
and this an indirect testifier cannot impart. I he 
evidence, however, of which the apostle speaks > 
actually imparts this knowledge : " Hereby we 
KNOW that he abideth in us, by the Spirit which 
he hath given us." Now, as direct knowledge 
cannot arise from an indirect testimony, and aa 
this direct or positive knowledge is recognised by 
the Apostle, and recognised as arising from the 
witness of the Spirit, it follows with commanding 
certainty, that this witness is, and must be, direct. 

The Prophet Isaiah, when describing the new 
covenant, expresses himself in the following words : 
" As for me, this is my covenant with them, saith 
the Lord, My Spirit which is upon thee, and my 
words which 1 have put into thy v • . 
shall not depart out of thy moutn, nor 
the mouth of thy seed, nor out of t : ^ 
of thy seeds' seed, saith the Lord, from 1. i 
forth and for ever." (fsa. lix. 21.) in th h ■ 
the promised application is evidently : 
His Spirit is said to be put 'udoh us, and his 

ft o 



3-16' 



words into our mouth ; and both are to continue 
for ever. His words are not said to be merely re- 
corded, that we might be instructed by them ; 
they are brought still nearer. They are not even 
said to be written on our hearts, though the heart 
is the spring of action ; but they are placed, if 
possible, still more remote from a medium, and 
are said to be put " into our mouths," into the 
very organ of utterance, so that nothing remains 
but that they be spoken. Is it possible then that 
there can be a medium between the organ of ut- 
terance and utterance itself ? between articulation, 
and the only instrument by which articulation can 
be performed ? If not, the words must reside with- 
in us; and the evidence which they impart must 
be direct. 

On examining the whole passage, we cannot but 
perceive that no medium whatever is introduced 

as the instrument of conveyance. On the con- 

j 

trary, the word is put into our mouths, and the 
Spirit is put upon us ; so that the divine Agent 
occupies the only place which it could be sup- 
posed to engross. Hence the whole process is 
clearly made out without a medium. The chain 
leaves no vacancy for such a link to supply. It is 
unbroken and entire ; and the introduction of a 
medium wirl derange its order, and annihilate its 
beauty. 

Saint Paul, in his epistle to the Hebrews, quotes 
from the prophet Jeremiah, a description of the 
same covenant, which they mutually amplify iu 
these words ; " For this is the covenant that I 



347 



will make with the house of Israel after those 
days, saith the Lord ; I will put my laws into 
their mind, and write them in their hearts ; and 
I will he to them a God, and they shall be to me 
a people. And they shall not teach every man his 
neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, 
Know the Lord; for ail shall know me, ficm the 
leastto the greatest/* (Jer. xxxi. 33, 34.Heb. viii. 10, 
11.) On combining this passage with that which 
I have just quoted from Isaiah, it appears that 
every avenue shall be filled up. The heart, the 
mind, the mouth, are all occupied by the Holy 
Agent, and a positive knowledge of the Lord is 
announced as the certain result. If then every 
avenue shall be filled with the law and word of 
God through his Spirit resting upon us, and if all 
our powers shall be so far renovated that all shall 
know him, from the least to the greatest, then it 
is evident that this knowledge must be intuitive; 
and, consequently, the witness by which this 
knowledge is obtained must be direct,. 

The same doctrine is repeated, and furthermore 
inculcated, by the great Apostle of the Gentiles, 
in his epistle to the Ephesians. His prayer runs 
thus : " That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, 
the Father of glory, may give unto you the Spirit 
of wisdom and revelation, in the knowledge of 
him ; the eyes of your understanding being en_ 
lightened; that ye may know what is the hope of 
his calling, and what the riches of the glory of 
his inheritance in the saints." (Eph. i. 17, 18.; 
That the enlightening here mentioned, is inward, 



348 



is too evident to be disputed ; for the Agent by 
which it is done, being the Spirit of wisdom and 
revelation, displays the cause; whilst our know- 
ledge of the hope of his calling, and of the fellow- 
ship of his sufferings, points out the effect. Now> 
if the witness with which this Holy Agent is at- 
tended, be only indirect, how can the effect pro- 
duced be positive or actual knowledge : Indirect 
testimony can never confer an evidence which shall 
rise higher than probability; and where nothing 
but probability is, there actual knowledge cannot 
be. But as the Apoatle positively declares, that 
our knowledge of certain a;iven facts is the result 
of that enlightening; which our understanding: im- 
mediately receives, the proof is decisive, that the 
evidence by which it is ascertained rises higher 
than probability. If, therefore, positive knowledge 
be produced, and the evidence to produce it must 
rise higher than probability, the testimony on 
which it rests cannot be indirect; and that witness 
which is not indirect, but rises above it, niust be 
direct. 

The same truth is also taught by the beloved 
disciple, and similar inferences may be made from 
his declaration : " Hereb} 7 know we that we 
dwell in him, and he in us, because he hath given 
us of his Spirit." (1 John, iv. 1:3.) In this passage 
also t ie residence of the Holy Spirit is declared, 
the knowledge of the fact is asserted, and the cause 
of it is assigned. Now, if the evidence on which 
this knowledge rests were only indirect, no ger- 



549 

titinty could be obtained. A deficiency in know- 
ledge is invariably accompanied with doubt, which 
is the offspring of ignorance. Now doubt is 
always so hostile to knowledge, that it is impos- 
sible they can exist together when applied at 
once to the same subject; for no man can doubt 
that which he knows. That knowledge is the re- 
sult of the evidence produced, the Apostle plainly 
declares; — " Hereby know we," &c; and hence 
it is certain, that the testimony from which it re- 
sults, cannot be that which terminates in doubt 
and uncertainty. But as that which terminates 
thus, cannot be higher than indirect, the conclu- 
sion follows, that nothing but a direct witness can 
be the foundation of the Apostle's proposition. 

To reject a direct witness from an apprehension 
that it is. delusive, or under a persuasion that 
we cannot resort to a more dangerous or fallacious 
Criterion, is to degrade the influence of the Holy 
Spirit. We must, in this case, suspect his inward 
testimony, and confide in our rational observations. 
We must exalt reason above the Holy Spirit, our 
own decisions above his dictates, and use the 
latter as an engine to drive the former from our- 
bosoms.. When David invited us to " taste and 
see that God is good," can it be thought that he 
had any intention to persuade us that " tastin^ 
and seeing" imply mediums ? Every one must- 
know that taste and sight are sensations, and as 
such can admit of no mediums. And that which 
imparts experimental knowledge without the inter- 



350 



vention of mediums, must afford an evidence which 
is direct. 

To reason, I acknowledge, lies our ultimate 
appeal; bat reason dictates when its operations 
are to be suspended. If, therefore, the influences 
of the Holy Spirit must be submitted to the test 
of reason, reason informs us that it is called upon 
to travel in a region which lies beyond its pro- 
vince : and we shall be compelled to desert its 
dictates by fondly attempting to enlarge its empire. 
To the dictates of the Holy Spirit, well informed 
reasons yields an implicit submission. They can- 
not, indeed, contradict each other, for both are 
precious gifts of Heaven ; but the former outsoars 
/ the latter, and leaves it to acknowledge that the 
flight is above its comprehension. But when re a- 
son, or something which bears that name, asserts, 
that the direct witness which the Holy Spirit im- 
parts, is " a mock sun/' u a dangerous criterion," 
" a satanic illusion,'* and we abide bv the decision, 
we compel it to arrogate to itself a right which its 
sober dictates disown. In this case reason acts an 
unreasonable part, and an unreasonable reason is a 
contradiction in terms. 

That a guilty sinner, when truly awakened by 
the Spirit of God, feels within himself a direct 
witness of his cruilt, sinfulness and condemnation, 
wii! hardly admit of any depute. Nothing but 
such a witness can make known to him a personal 
application of general truths, and say to his con- 
science, " Thou art the man." An indirect wit- 



OO I 

rtess can never impart a positive conviction ; aixT 
nothing short of positive conviction can truly 
awaken a sinner, and urge him to forsake sin, and 
seek earnestly after God. But these effects are 
actually produced; the conclusion therefore fol- 
lows, that the evidence or witness to produce them, 
is direct. Now, if genuine personal conviction 
cannot be produced without a direct witness, it 
must follow that a sense of condemnation in which 
the conviction in part consists, cannot be removed 
by a witness that is indirect. An indirect w itness 
can never remove what a direct witness supports, 
for no effect can be greater than its cause. Let 
this be granted, and the consequence is inevitable 
— that something more than an indirect witness is 
necessary to remove an effect which a direct wit- 
ness had begotten. 

That the effect of conviction is to be removed, 
is the plain language of scripture. St. Paul says, 
" Being justified by faith, we have peace with 
God through our Lord Jesus Christ;" (Rom. v. 1.) 
and in another place he adds, There is, there- 
fore, now no condemnation to them which are in 
Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but 
after the Spirit." (Rom. viii. 1.) Now, whenever 
" the soul is baptized with the fire of divine love, 
when a well, yea, rivers of living waters spring up 
within it unto eternal life," it is certain that a sense 
of condemnation must be removed. If, therefore, 
a sense of condemnation be taken away, and no 
indirect evidence of the fact be sufficient to destroy 



352 



wdiat nothing but a direct evidence could beget, 
the conclusion is undeniable, that a direct wit- 
ness of the Spirit must be admitted, in what 
stage soever of experience it may be supposed to 
appear. 

Saint Paul having informed us, that as many 
as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons 
of God, ,? proceeds further to describe this divine 
gift : " For ye have not received (says he) the 
spirit of bondage again to fear, but ye have re- 
ceived the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, 
Abba, Father. The Spirit itself beareth witness 
with our spirit, that we are the children of God* 
(Rom. viii. 14 — Hi.) 

In the latter passage two spirits are evidently 
introduced to our notice ; the one is the Spirit of 
God, the other is our own. The testimony or evi- 
dence which results from these spirits, is also dis- 
tinguished; that of the Spirit of God is not, in- 
deed, specifically described, but it is intelligibly 
expressed ; " The Spirit itself beareth witness with 
our spirit, that w r e are the children of God." 

In speaking of the w itness of cur own spirit, 
Mr. Wesley writes thus : " Now r tills is properly 
the testimony of our own spirit ; even the testi- 
mony of our conscience, that God hath given 
us to be holy of heart, and holy in outward con- 
versation. It is a consciousness of our having 
received, in and by the Spirit of adoption, the 
tempers mentioned in the word of God, as belong- 
ing to his adopted children ; even a loving heart 



353 



towards God, and toward mankind, hanging With 
child-like confidence on God our Father, desiring 
nothing bat him, casting all our care upon him, 
and embracing every child of man with earnest 
tender affection, so as to be ready to lay down our 
life for our brother, as Christ laid down his life 
for us ; a consciousness that we are inwardly con- 
formed, by the Spirit of God, to the image of his 
Son, and that we walk before him in justice, 
mercy, and truth, doing the things which are 
pleasing in his sight " (Sermons, vol. i. p. 
To the numerous observations which Mr. W. has 
thus summed up in the preceding paragraph, I 
shall make no additions, because the facts, being 
admitted both by Mr. H. and ourselves, form no 
part whatever of the present controversy. 

" But what is that testimony of God's Spirit 
(Mr. W. asks) which is superadded to, and con- 
joined with this ? How does he bear witness with 
our spirit that we are the children of God ? It is 
hard (he observes) to find -words in the language 
of men to explain the deep things of God. In- 
deed, there are none which will adequately express 
what the children of God experience. But, per- 
haps, one might say (desiring any who are taught 
of God to soften or strengthen the expression), 
the testimony of the Spirit is an inward impres- 
sion on the soul, whereby the Spirit of God di- 
rectly witnesses to my spirit that I am a child of 
God ; that Jesus hath loved me, and given him-* 



I 



354 



S&elf forme; that I, even I, am reconciled to God. 

(p. mr 

This statement of a direct witness, that u it is 
an inward impression on the soul/' &c. Mr. H. 
positively rejects as unseriptural ; and the reason- 
ings by which the fact is supported, he views as 
" a tower built upon the sand." Mr. W. in a 
subsequent page of his sermon, in illustrating the 
subject which he designed to enforce, has made 
the following observation : u Suppose God were 
now to speak to any soul—" Thy sins are forgiven 
thee/' he must be willing that soul should know 
his voice, otherwise he would speak in vain. And 
he is able to effect this ; for whenever he wills, to 
do is present with him. And he does effect it. 
That soul is absolutely assured tibs voice is the 
voice of God. But yet he who hath that witness 
in himself, cannot explain it to any one who hath 
it not." (p. 203.) 

On connecting together these two passages 
which are divided bv no less than ten pages, Mr. 
H. has selected out the two words " impression" 
and " voice," and reiterated u voice and impres- 
sion," " impression and voice," as though Mr. W. 
had actually affirmed, that the direct witness of 
the Spirit consisted hi an audible voice, articulated 
by the organs of speech ; or had meant by the 
word " impression" something corporeal, or bear- 
ing a strong resemblance to it. And against such 
an impression, and such a voice, he directs his ar» 



355 



guments, as though Mr. W. had actually intro- 
duced the terms in the sense in which they are 
quoted. 

The expression in which the word voice occurs 
in Mr. YVYs sermon, is evidently only illustrative 
and comparative. The whole is a supposed case, 
not a real one ; and is only designed to point out 
the connection between this voice, admitting it to 
have been given, and the sensibility which it begets 
if uttered and heard. Yet this hypothetical and 
illustrative relation, Mr. H. has assumed as an 
asserted fact; and has represented Mr. W.'s view 
of the direct witness, as consisting in an " impres- 
sion or voice," though he had forewarned all 
against it, by the following caution : H It is hard 
to find words in the language of men to explain 
the deep things of God. Indeed, there are none 
that will adequately express what the children of 
God experience.' 1 " What are ten thousand 
i( voices and impressions," (Mr. H. asl;s,) in com- 
parison of this indwelling God ? What are they f 
From my heart I believe them to be satanic illu- 
sions ; to draw us away from the True Witness, a$ 
the damnatory clause is, to degrade scriptural as- 
surance." (p. 118.) 

From the manner in which Mr. H. has depicted 
our views, it would appear, that the direct witness 
for which we contend, is a something uncon- 
nected with, if not hostile, to the indwelling God ; 
whereas the reverse is the case, It consists in <m 



356 



inward influence upon the mind, or mental impres- 
sion, which the presence of the indwelling God 
occasions by his residence. It is a manifestatioit 
of his love, which sheds a soft tranquillity over the 
soul, diffusing a spiritual warmth or vitality 
through all our spiritual powers, and begetting 
within our bosoms a satisfactory assurance that 
the moral relation in which we stood to God is 
changed. It is that which enables us to view a 
reconciled God ; which presents the Sun of Righ- 
teousness to our sight ; and which discovers the 
balm of Gilead applied to our wounded hearts. It 
is an internal evidence wdiieh the indwelling God 
affords of his presence, by which we know that 
the sacrifice of Christ has been available in our 
behalf i and that being interested in him, God is 
no longer a consuming fire. This, if Mr. Home's 
observations have any application to us, is what 
he contrasts with the real indwelling God, and 
plainly calls " a satanic illusion." 

Nothing, however, can be farther from my 
view, than to insinuate that this light, by whtch 
we discern the love of God' manifested towards us, 
shines alike in all, or is even accompanied at all 
times with the same degree of lustre to the same 
person. Few individuals, perhaps, experience it 
alike. Our love towards God, our peace and joy 
in the Holy Ghost, which, in no small degree, de- 
pend upon these manifestations, partake, perhaps, 
in most believers of similar variations ; so few 



357 



there arc, I am afraid, who constantly and fully 
live up_to the glorious privileges of the Christian 
dispensation. 

"That this testimony of the Spirit of God (says 
Mr. Wesley) must needs, in the very nature of 
things, be antecedent to the testimony of our own 
spirit, may appear fiorn this single consideration : 
We must be holy of heart and holy in life, before 
we can be conscious that we are so ; before we 
can have the testimony of our spirit that we are 
inwardly and outwardly holy. But we must love 
God, before we can be holy at all, this being the 
root of all holiness. Isow we cannot love God 
till we know he loves us. We iove him, be- 
cause he first loved us. And we cannot know his 
pardoning love to us, till his Spirit witnesses 
jt to our spirit. Since, therefore, this testimony 
of his Spirit must precede the love of God and all 
holiness, of consequence, it must precede our in- 
Avard consciousness thereof, or the testimony of our 
spirit concerning them." (Sermons, vol. i. p. 193.) 

To counteract the efficacy of Mr. W/s reason- 
ings in. the above paragraph, Mr. H. has employed 
several of his succeeding pages ; but with what 
success remains briefly to be examined. 

a L Though Mr. Wesley's reasoning (he ob- 
serves) were absolutely conclusive, it could not 
prove the direct witness he contends for. When 
the love of God is fully shed abroad in my heart 
hy the Holy Spirit of adoption, 1 laugh at all 
other witness, and while it abides there, I need 
jione." (p. 117 ,118.) 1 feel no desire to interrupt 



358 



this Rev. Gentleman's laughter, provided he allow 
that the Spirit of adoption brings with it an inter- 
nal evidence of its existence and actual residence; 
an evidence which lies at the root of that peace, 
love and joy, which we in return feel towards God* 
But if, on the contrary, he recognises the Spirit 
of adoption, without admitting it to afford any 
prior evidence of that power which can alone 
excite withih us those graces and internal fruits 
which are acknowledged by all, he must teach us 
to love God without having any inward manifesta- 
tion of his love towards us, prior to our love to 
him, at a moment when we declare that we love 
him because he first loved us. In this case, he 
must permit us to smile at him, if we please, for 
adopting a fact, as a certain effect of a cause of 
which he confesses himself to be destitute of all 
evidence, antecedently to the effect adopted. 

To keep his laughter in countenance, Mr. H. 
asserts as follows : " Their justifying faith is aa 
assurance of the remission of sins. Still they 
want more assurance. \ou then give them a di- 
rect witness, which, wonderful to say ! though it 
has no criteria by which it is distinguished, pro- 
duces an assurance as indubitable, as a man has 
of the sun's shining, when he stands in the full blaze 
of his beams ! ! !" p. 118. This statement we deny. 
We only contend, that before we can believe in 
the remission of sins, some evidence of the fact 
must be imparted to the mind, as the basis of 
this faith; and that this, as being the primary 
witness of the fact, must, from the nature of its 



359 



existence, precede this faith, and therefore must be 
direct. " Yet this direct witness is not the Spirit 
of love, power, and of a sound mind*" (p. 118.) 
Certainly not; our love, power, and soundness of 
mind, are effects or fruits which the Spirit pro- 
duces when we receive him. But grateful love 
can never be excited within our bosoms,, until we 
have some inward evidence that God first loves 
us ; and this never can be obtained until his love, 
in a greater or less degree, is shed abroad in our 
hearts by the Holy Ghost given unto us ; because 
it is from this love that the evidence of its com- 
Uuunication springs. 

" 2. I grant, the testimony of the Spirit goes 
before the testimony of our spirit; but I deny 
what Mr. Wesley assumes without even an at- 
tempt to prove it, as though the fact were self- 
evident ; that the testimony of the Spirit is direct, 

and such as he describes it." " In all his ordinarv 

i 

operations, I affirm, the Spirit speaketh by the 
word, and worketh by faith in that word." (p. 1 ]8, 
1 19.) To arguments which derive their chief force 
from " I deny," and " I affirm," we have nothing 
to answer. Mr. H. here grants that the testimony 
of the Spirit of God goes before the testimony 
of our spirit, and by so doing he eventually ad- 
mits the very thing which he denies ; for whether 
the Spirit speaketh by the word or not, is not the 
question. Let the prior testimony of the Spirit 
be granted, and the direct witness cannot be re- 
fused. If the Spirit sneak by the word, so as to 



36'0 



produce conviction, an awakening power must in- 
tervene between the word and the soul, in order 
to bring the threatenings home, and to rivet con- 
viction ; and this awakening power must be sup- 
ported by a direct evidence, in order to produce 
the effect. In like manner, if the consoling Spirit 
of adoption speak by the word, he must intervene 
between the word and our souls to apply the 
promises, and must bring with him a direct testi- 
mony in order to obtain credit, and produce the 
effects attributed to his gracious operations. Let 
this be denied, and the testimony of our spirit 
must precede that of the Spirit of God ; let this 
be granted, and the direct witness is acknow- 
ledged. 

3. Mr. Wesley asserts, " We must be holy of 
heart and holy in life, before we can be conscious 
that we are so." This Mr. H. allows. " We 
must love God (Mr. W. affirms) before we can be 
holv at all, this beino; the root of all holiness." In 
reply to this last argument, Mr. H. says, " A 
religion in which there is no love, is vile and con- 
temptible. It is a sacrifice without a heart. If ye 
jove me, said Jesus, keep my commandments. 
Wherever, therefore, there is the fruit of godly 
obedience, there also is the principle of filial fear." 
(p. 120.) In this passage, Mr. H. should have 
said " filial love" not " filial /W ;" for love, and 
not fear, was the thing to be proved. But this 
would have compelled him to infer love from 
obedience, as he now infers fear. Yet how either 



361 



love or fear is to be made out by inference, it is 
hard to say. Mr. H. has said, that " peace, love, 
joy, &c. abundantly shed abroad in the heart, are 
as real and indubitable objects of internal feeling, 
as anger, fear, or covetousness." (p. 116.) Here 
fear and love are supported by their proper 
evidences, without being inferred from obedience, 
or any other principle. Mr. H. is the author of 
both positions, and I must leave him to reconcile 
them together. 

"Is the glorious Gospel (Mr. H. asks) not 
worthy to be believed ? and if I do believe in 
my loving Father and Redeemer, will not precious 
faith produce some degree of holy love, without 
this direct witness ?" (p. 122.) St. Paul has said, 
that love is a fruit of the Spirit. (Gal. v. 22.) 
But if we admit love to be produced by faith, 
agreeably to the language before us, I fear that 
" human tradition will not only gain admission 
into the secrets of the sanctuary," but supplant 
the declaration of the Apostle, and make faith 
usurp the place of the Holy Spirit. 

If the testimony of God's Spirit precedes that 
of ours, as Mr. Wesley asserts, and Mr. Home 
admits, it is evident that it must be communicated 
prior to the removal of a sense of condemnation 
from our minds, or rather is that by which it is 
accomplished, just as light by its appearance 
banishes darkness ; for a removal of a sense of 
condemnation is an effect of the divine favor, just 
as the retirement of darkness is an effect of 

R 



362 



appearing light. It is certain, that nothing but a 
sense of the divine favor is capable of removing 
a sense of condemnation ; for the divine favor not 
manifested, can never be ascertained, or acknow- 
ledged as such. Now, if nothing but a sense of 
the favor of God be competent to the production 
of this effect, and this effect be actually produc- 
ed, the prior evidence of that favor must be mani- 
fested in order to its accomplishment ; and, con- 
sequently, the witness, from the priority of its na- 
ture, must be direct. It is not possible that we 
can love God, while we labour under a sense of 
condemnation ; condemnation, therefore, must 
he removed prior to our love to God, in 
order to make way for it. If, therefore, our love 
towards God presupposes his love towards 
us, and his love be manifested in the removal of 
a sense of condemnation, which also is prior to 
our love, it follows, that the evidence by which 
this love is displayed, must act immediately upon 
our souls to produce these effects. Thus the re- 
moval of a sense of condemnation from our minds 
must be known prior to our loving of God, and, 
consequently, prior to all those holy fruits which 
result from it. The knowledge therefore of this 
important fact, can never reach us any other way 
than by a direct witness, because it precedes all 
mediums through which it might be presumed 
to act. 

But admitting this direct witness for which we 
contend ; — a witness which ; in point of time, and 



363 



in the order of nature, precedes those effects both 
inward and outward which result from the commu- 
nication of divine love, of which* this inward 
testimony is the evidence — " By what criteria, it 
is asked, shall it be known to be genuine f How 
shall the witness be distinguished from the voice 
of a stranger ?" u Is this direct witness, Mr. H. 
asks, repeated from day to day V 9 (p. 115.) In 
reply to this question, our Lord answers : u . If any 
man love me, he will keep my words, and my 
Father will love him, and we will come unto him, 
and make our abode with him." (John, xiv. 25.) 
Again, the Comforter is given, "that he may abide 
with- us for ever." (v. 16.) Those, therefore, who 
stand fast in that liberty wherewith Christ hath 
made them free, (Gal. v. 1.) having an inward 
steady evidence of Christ in them the hope of 
glory, do not want the repetition of a voice from 
day to day, as Mr. H. has strangely inquired, and 
perhaps more strangely imagined. 

Secondly, this direct witness may be distinguish- 
ed from the voice of a stranger, by the fruits and 
effects which immediately follow it. " Peace, 
love, and joy, abundantly shed abioacl in the 
heart, are as real and indubitable objects of inter- 
nal feeling, as anger, fear, or covetousness." Now, 
if the witness which attests the Spirit's presence, 
be accompanied with these blessed fruits, so that old 
things pass away, and all things become new, what 
shall prevent him kvho possesses it, from distin- 
guishing the gold from the dross, the genuine wit- 
ness from the illusion ? 



364 



Thirdly, It is accompanied with the outward 
works, arising from proper motives, which form 
the visible part of the Christian character. " The 
scriptures teach, (says Mr. Wesley,) This is the 
love of God (the sure mark thereof) that we keep 
his commandments. (I John, v. 3.) And our Lord 
himself saith, he that keepeth my commandments, 
he it is that loveth me. (John, xiv. 21.) Love 
rejoice th to obey; to do in every point whatever 
is acceptable to the Beloved. A true lover of 
God hastens to do his will on earth as it is done in 
heaven." (vol. i. p. 200.) Here then are decisive 
and indubitable marks, both internal and external, 
with which this evidence is accompanied, and 
by which it may be known from " a satanic 
suggestion." 

But " if, on the other hand, it (the direct wit- 
ness) be an abiding voice, ever echoing in your 
ears, surely, in so long a time, you might tell us 
how you distinguish it from the voice of a stran- 
ger" (p. 1 15.) " He, (says Mr. W.) who hath that 
witness in himself, cannot explain it to one who 
hath it not. Nor is it to be expected that he 
should. Were there any natural medium to prove, 
or natural method to explain, the things of God, 
to unexperienced men, then the natural man 
might discern and know the things of the Spirit 
of God " (p. 203. vol. i.) " The Spirit of adop- 
tion (says Mr. H. most truly, but most inconsis- 
tently, because he denies a direct witness) brings 
its own evidence; but it is an evidence which 



365 



cannot be produced, or made satisfactory to any 
one but ourselves. Our external visible fruits ; — 
our words, actions, tempers, are the evidence we 
must bring forward to the world and the church." 
(p. 12oo) Here Mr. H. has completely answered 
his own question, and by so doing, precluded the 
necessity of all further reply. 

But " if our last, and only, satisfactory appeal 
lies to the Spirit's holy fruits, who does not see, 
that it is by them the Spirit truly witnesses f 
(p. 124.) To this genuine witness we have no 
objection. But is not the passage artful)}^ worded ? 
We never denied, nor attempted to do so, that 
" by these fruits the Spirit truly witnesses." But 
Mr. H., to make good his ground, after having 
denied a direct witness, should have asserted, that 
it is by these fruits that the Spirit exclusively wit- 
nesses. This he seems to have had some scruples 
in affirming ; for had he done so, it would have 
overturned another part of his hypothesis, in which 
he has asserted, that" a man may have faith with- 
out discerning it, and without having comfort." 
To have introduced the word, " exclusive- 
ly /* would, therefore, have demolished no incon- 
siderable part of his theory ; and having omitted 
it, his question * does not weigh the feather of a 
goose." 

" When a man recognises his faith, he realises 
his assurance. His faith stands simply and wholly 
on the promises of God made to him in Christ. 
His assurance stands on two legs ; the right on 



366' 



those faithful promises ; the left, ou his conscious- 
ness that he hath so believed those promises which 
are yea and amen in Christ." (p. 115, 116.) That 
the faith which justifies, includes within it nothing 
of assurance, Mr.H. has positively told us, (p. 84.) 
though he now asserts that when a man recognises 
his faith, he realises his assurance. It is evident 
from hence, that assurance must arise from a con- 
sciousness, that, with a faith destitute of ail assur- 
ance, we have believed the promises of the gospel! 
Now, if that faith by which we lay hold on the 
promises, be devoid of ali assurance, it is certain 
that a recognition of it can never beget assurance ; 
for it is absurd to suppose that assurance can re- 
sult from the mere recognition of that which is 
destitute of it. This is an unpleasant circum- 
stance, which makes " the left leg" of assurance 
lame. 

A consciousness of the divine favor, admitting 
it to be imparted, can never beget a sense of that 
favor, because this consciousness is an effect which 
results from it. The thing itself must, therefore, be 
communicated, before any consciousness of it can 
be possessed ; and must impart some previous evi- 
dence of its existence, and personal application, 
in order to beget this consciousness. That this 
primary evidence, by which consciousness is begot- 
ten, cannot be faith, or the effect of it, is evident 
also, because faith itself, in all its stages, is sub- 
sequent to consciousness. I cannot believe that I 
enjoy the divine favor till I am conscious of it j 



367 



consciousness, therefore, cannot in this case be pre- 
ceded by faith. If, therefore, consciousness be an 
evidence of any given fact, and this consciousness 
cannot be preceded by faith, the immediate parent 
of this consciousness must be an intuitive mani- 
festation of the thing known or believed ; and 
every intuitive manifestation must be direct. 

The fruits of the Spirit presuppose the opera- 
tion of the Spirit ; and peace with God presup- 
poses that operation to be known ; because peace 
can only flow from a consciousness of favor. Now, 
whatever is presupposed cannot be begotten by 
iuiy effects which result from it; for this would 
make the effect contribute towards the production 
of its own cause. But as this cannot be admitted, 
it follows, that the evidence by which that which 
is presupposed is ascertained, must be direct. 

But " the right leg of assurance, it seems, stands 
on those faithful promises, and the left on our con- 
sciousness that we have so believed those promises 
which a re vea and amen." Now, according to this 
statement;, it appears that assurance does not arise 
from faith in God, or Christ, or the promises of the 
gospel, but from a strong degree of confidence in 
our own faith, which is destitute of it. We must 
believe the promises of the gospel with a faith 
that is devoid of assurance, in order to justifica- 
tion ; and then recognise this very faith, and re- 
alise our assurance ! 'Thus assurance is no longer 
the gift of God; it is not wrought in the soul by 
the Holy Spirit ; but " it is a truth of second rank 



368 



and virtue, deduced from a primary one by faith 
and reason." (p. 116.) St. Paul asserts, that the 
Gospel came not unto the Thessalonians in word 
only, but in power, and in the Holy Ghost, and 
in much assurance. (1 Thess. i. 5.) But Mr. H. 
cautions us against an obvious error into which 
we might certainly have fallen, by assuring us that 
it is only -f a truth of second rank and virtue, de- 
duced from a primary one by the co-operation of 
faith and reason." The same Apostle speaks of 
the &I1 assurance of faith (Heb. x. 22.) ; but Mr. 
II . separating faith from assurance, degrades the 
latter to a secondary rank, and calls in an auxili- 
ary power ; and, propping faith with reason, in- 
directly hints at the inaccuracy of the Apostolic 
observation, and draws assurance from a cause and 
combination which the scriptures no where assign. 
A faith which is destitute of all assurance, may 
call reason to its aid to produce assurance ; but 
this will only prove its inadequacy to the purposes 
tor which it was given. This circumstance may 
make the co-operation of reason necessary ; but 
u the left leg" of assurance must be very lame, 
indeed, to want the assistance of such a crutch. 

Faith, whether considered as a recipient or 
anticipating power of the soul, can never contri- 
bute towards any of those evidences on which it 
rests, and from which it derives its existence. 
Both the facts themselves, and the evidences by 
which they are attested, on which faith lays 
hold, must be made known to the mind prior 
tc the operative existence of faith, because these 



369 

evidences and facts call faith into action. " How 
shall we call on him, in whom we have not be- 
lieved; and how shall we believe in him, of 
whom we have not heard !" (Rom. x. 14.) It is 
to our perceptive consciousness that these facts 
are first manifested; for that of which we are 
wholly unconscious, can never be an object either 
of our belief or knowledge. If, therefore, the 
mind must be conscious of the favor of God, 
before it can believe it, and a sense of this favor 
must be communicated before we can be conscious 
of it, the evidence or witness that produces this 
consciousness which lays a foundation for faith, 
whether imparted to the mind through a medium, 
or without one, must be direct. 

In p. 126. Mr. H. descants upon the fatal 
consequences to which he conceives the doctrine 
of the direct witness is calculated to lead ; but 
in this procedure ais progress is somewhat singular. 
In the first stage he supposes the evil possible ; 
presently it becomes highly probable ; in the next 
place, he gives it a tone of certainty ; and, finally, 
argues from it as formidably as though his con- 
clusions had been all fairly inferred by legitimate 
induction. He has, however, had candour enough 
to insert from Mr. Wesley's writings a sufficient, 
antidote against his ow r n conclusions. These ob- 
servations clearly show, that the doctrine against 
which he argues has no necessary connection with 
the evils he has supposed; and every one knows,that 
if a doctrine must be abandoned because it is lia* 

R 5 



370 



ble to abuse, there is not one that can be retained. 
The greatest blessings that God has ever bestowed 
on man, both of a temporal and a spiritual nature, 
have not only been liable to abuse, but have actu- 
ally been abused, and prostituted to the basest of 
purposes. If, therefore, this were admitted as a 
treason why they should be rejected, every thing 
that has been violated must be discarded, and in 
this case w r e shall banish excellency from the 
world. 

f- That joy in the Lord, (says Mr. Wesley,) 
which accompanies the witness of the Spirit, is 
an humble joy, that abases to the dust ; that 
makes a pardoned sinner cry out, 1 am vile. 
What am I, or my fathers house ? Now mine eye 
seeth thee, I repent in dust and ashes. And 
wherever lowliness is, there is meekness, patience, 
gentleness, long-suffering. There is a soft yield- 
ing spirit, a mildness and sweetness ; a tenderness 
of soul which words cannot express. But do 
these fruits attend the supposed testimony in a 
presumptuous man ? Just the reverse. The more 
confident he is of the favor of God, the more is 
he lifted up," &c. (Sermons, vol. i. p. tyg.) 

As there is an obvious, inherent, and essential 
difference between light and darkness, between 
the glimmering of a taper and the light of the 
noon-day sun ; so Mr. W. observes, there is u in 
like manner an essential difference between spiri- 
tual light and spiritual darkness : between the 
light wherewith the Sun of Righteousness shmes 
upon qui* hearts, and that glimmering light which 



371 

arises only from sparks of our own kindling. And 
this difference also is immediately and directly 
perceived, if our spiritual senses are rightly dis- 
posed." " But to require a more minute and 
philosophical account of the manner whereby we 
distinguish these, and of the criteria or intrinsic 
marks whereby we know the voice of God, is, he 
contends, to make a demand which never can be 
answered." To illustrate this, he introduces the 
case of St. Paul, when relating the circumstances 
of his conversion before Agrippa. " Suppose, 
(says he) when Paul answered before Agrippa, 
the wise Roman had said, " Thou talk est of 
" hearing the voice of the Son of God. How 
ic dost thou know it was his voice ? By what 
" criteria, what intrinsic marks, dost thou know 
" the voice of God ? Explain to me the manner 
a of distinguishing this from a human or angelic 
*.* voice i v Can you believe the Apostle himself 
would have once attempted to answer so idle a 
demandr And yet, doubtless, the moment he heard 
that voice, he knew it was the voice of God, 
But how he knew this, who is able to explain ? 
Perhaps neither man nor angel." 

(Sermons, vol. i. p. 202.) 
But Mr. W., it seems, " betrays the weakness 
of his cause, by acknowledging the voice he con- 
tends for has no criteria of its own, and by put- 
ting it on a level with a miracle." (p. 132.) it, 
however, happens, that Mr. VV. does not put it on 
a level with a mjracle, as. Mr. TI. has supposed. 



372 



He only Introduces a miracle as a something which 
has no specific criterion with which we are ac- 
quainted; and seizes this single circumstance to 
illustrate his argument, and confirm his conclusion, 
that the want of specific criteria is no argument 
against the certainty of fact. This is an inference 
which Mr. H. has been endeavouring to repel, 
that he might make room for another, and con- 
clude that the want of criteria is a proof of delusion 
or non-existence. 

But granting that Mr. W. had placed the direct 
w itness for which he contends, on a level with 
miracle, in what manner would his conduct have 
appeared presumptuous ? Are not all the Spirit's 
operations and effects miraculous ? Is not that 
faith which is of the operation of God — is not 
conversion — is not adoption — is not a sense of 
pardon — -and is not Christ in us the hope of glory, 
miraculous ? Nature cannot accomplish these gra- 
cious works ; and that w r hich is performed by a 
superior power, must bear the appellation. But 
Mr. H. denies that there is any thing miraculous 
in either. " For though the Spirit of adoption 
be in itself above all miracles, it neither suspends, 
nor contradicts, one law of nature. It adds to it, 
but takes nothing from it." (p. 134.) In this pas- 
sage, Mr. H. has given us only a partial definition 
of miracle. Miracle is that by which any action 
is performed which nature cannot accomplish ; for 
to nothing else can w r e ascribe those actions which 
xise above her power. He allows, that " the Spirit 



373 



of adoption, as to its power and effect, is above 
all miracles." But how any thing can be clone 
which is neither miraculous nor not miraculous,— 
or how any thing can add to the laws of nature 
without being miraculous, he has not informed us,, 
and I have not ingenuity enough to discover. 

" Suppose (says Mi*. W.) God were now to 
speak to any soul, Thy sins are forgiven thee, 
he must be willing that soul should know his 
voice, otherwise he would speak in vain. And he 
is able to effect this, &c. and he does effect it." 
(vol. i. p. £02.) On quoting this passage, Mr. H. 
replies, " I suppose no such thing." And yet, after 
denying the premises, he argues against the con- 
clusion with as much seriousness, as though it had 
been founded on facts which were unconnected 
with the supposed case on which it rests. But 
Mr. W. it seems, " calvinizes" by making the sup* 
position* And to prove that his argument is un- 
founded, Mr. H. introduces a fancied parallel, 
drawn from our Lord's discourses to his disciples, 
relative to his mission, the death he was to ac- 
complish at Jerusalem, and the great events of 
which he spoke. " Could he not (Mr. H. asks) 
have conveyed to them an indubitable knowledge 
of the events he spake of? Unquestionably. Did 
he do so i He did not. Why did he not ? Be* 
cause he would not give miraculous testimony to 
truths on which depended the work of grace— 
the honest or dishonest heart. He left them 
sufficiently clear, in connection with the evidence 



374 



he still meant to give, for godly men to believed 
(p. 134.) That the words which Christ spake to 
his disciples, while here on earth, were not thought 
by him to be adequate to every purpose of their 
experimental instruction, is plain from the promise 
which he gave them of another Comforter, w hich 
should lead them into all truth, and bring all 
things to their remembrance. This promise was 
verified on the day of Pentecost in an emphatical 
manner, and is spiritually fulfilled from day to 
day in every believing soul. It is for the accom- 
plishment of those promises which teach the 
knowledge of salvation by the remission of sins, 
and the enjoyment of Christ in the heart by faith, 
that Mr. W. contends. And " God is able to 
effect this ; for whenever he w r ills, to do is 
present with him. And he does effect it," in 
every sincerely penitent and believing heart. 

a But he who hath that witness in himself, can- 
not (says Mr. W.) explain it to one who hath it 
not." This Mr. H. grants to be the case to car- 
nal men. " But will it hold good (he asks) to those 
in whose hearts the peace, love, and joy of the 
Lord are revealed by the Spirit ? If it does not, 
why then do you not explain it to us, that we 
may grow in grace, and in the knowledge of 
our Lord Jesus Christ ? Are those who have the 
adopting Spirit carnal, and incapable of compre- 
hending you r if you insist, it is inexplicable to 
those who have it not : I answer, then it is a 
miraculous gift, or a word without meaning. For 



375 



myself, I do not hesitate to declare my opinion, 
that it is the last." (p. 134, &c) In reply to these 
questions, Mr. H. will probably not dispute my 
authority, if 1 produce his own words. Hie an- 
swer fairly meets his interrogatories ; and leaves 
less room for debate, than the two quotations do 
for reconciliation. " The Spirit of adoption brings 
its own evidence, but it is an evidence which can- 
not be produced, or made satisfactory to any one 
but ourselves." (p. 125.) Mr. H. knows who has 
said, " if you insist, it is inexplicable to those who 
have it not; i answer, then it is a miraculous gift, 
oi'vox et preterea nihil, a word without a meaning." 

" Had this sermon (says Mr. H.) been analysed 
by Mr. Wesley, as written by another, how easily 
would he have perceived, that the writer argues 
in a circle. Without scripture proof, he assumes 
an inward " impression or voice" to be the wit- 
ness of the Spirit, and, when pressed by objec^ 
tions, he proves this direct witness by the fruits of 
the Spirit. The fallacy is clear to a logician," &c. 
{p. 135) In reply to this, I answer, that the " im- 
pression or voice" is not the thing he assumes as 
the witness of the Spirit, as Mr. H. has described 
them, but only imperfect representations of the 
fact ; for he knew that " it cannot be produced 
or made satisfactory to any but ourselves/ 7 JN either 
does Mr. W. prove this direct witness by the fruits 
of the Spirit. He appeals to the fruits of the 
Spirit, to prove that mis witness is genuine and 
not spurious, but not to prove the existence of the 



376 



witness itself. The fallacy, therefore, of the in* 
ference which is attempted to be made, will appear 
evident to common readers, as well as logicians. 

" I acknowledge (Mr. H. observes) Satan cannot 
make us humble and holy. But neither will an 
inward voice : which, though it had all possible 
evidence that it w r as immediately from the Spirit, 
must, in its nature, be a transient thing ; whereas, 
we seek an abiding witness, which will open our 
understandings to understand the scriptures, 
strengthen our faith to receive them with more 
cordiality, and daily fill us with peace, love, and 
joy, in believing." (p. 136.) 

We grant that an inward voice cannot make us 
holy ; and on the same ground, contend that 
neither can an outward one, unless accompanied 
with divine power. But still we believe, that the 
Spirit which bears this witness can accomplish all 
things necessary to our salvation. It is against 
this, and not against its evidence, that Mr. H. 
should have directed his observations ; and by not 
having done it, he has written to little purpose. 
We do not, however, consider this inward witness 
to be a transient thing, unless the residence of the 
Holy Spirit in our hearts be a transient thing. But 
if the latter be permanent and abiding, no reason 
can be assigned why the evidence of his presence 
must be undulating and temporary. The notion 
of a real voice has led to this error ; but we dis- 
claim the cnarge, and the idea conveyed by it. 



The direct witness for which we contend, is a 
light which shineth into our hearts by the Holy 
Spirit, affording to lis the earliest evidence of our 
adoption, Mr. Baxter, in the words which Mr. 
H. has quoted from his confession of faith, (p. 50.) 
observes as follows : " If there be any thing (as 
a surely there is) in which the Divine Nature and 
" Spirit of adoption consisteth, it must be this 
" holy appetite of the soul for God, by way of 
u love, which is bred by an internal sense of his 
" loveliness, and love to man : which differenceth 
" a Christian from other men, as a child differs 
u towards its father from strangers or neighbours. 
46 Till the love of God be the very state or nature 
" of the soul, (working there towards his honour, 
u interests, word, and servants,) no man can say 
" that he is God's habitation by the Spirit. And 

how the heart will ever thus be habited, without 
" believing God's love to us, it is hard to con- 
" ceive." What inducement Mr. H. could have 
had to quote this passage, I am at a loss to con- 
ceive. For, if " the holy appetite of the soul for 
God be bred by an internal sense of his loveliness, 
and love to man," then there must be an internal 
and direct witness of the fact : so that the words 
of Mr Baxter confirm those doctrines they were 
produced to overthrow. 

The last eight pages of Mr. Home's book are 
rather admonitory and apolcgetical than argu- 
mentative, and, therefore, require no particular re- 



373 



ply. Unfortunately, the greater portion of Mr. 
Home's admonitions will lose a considerable part 
of their intended effect, by being inapplica- 
ble to us. We do not, by insisting on a direct 
witness, attempt to set aside the fruits of the 
Spirit either inwardly or outwardly ; much less do 
we supersede their necessity by any thing we ad- 
vance. To this fact, Mr. Wesley's sermon on the 
witness of the Spirit will bear the most ample 
proof. And, indeed, for this fact, ?vlr. H. is not 
backward at times to give us credit ; though he 
speaks on some occasions as if he viewed us in 
a different light. It is to these fruits, both in- 
ternal and external, that we appeal, when called 
upon to assign a reason for the hope that is in 
us ; and from their conformity to the written word 
we draw satisfactory evidence, that we have not 
u passed by the most glorious thing in Christianity, 
and placed a mere suggestion on the throne, and 
dignified it as the direct witness of the Spirit." 

But while we assert, that the direct witness of 
the Spirit cannot set aside its internal and external 
acknowledged fruits, we contend that these ac- 
knowledged fruits cannot set aside this direct 
witness. It is the primary personal manifestation 
of God s love to our souls ; and while it imme- 
diately emanates from this blessed source, it lies 
at the foundation of all our grateful returns to 
God. It flow r s from his peculiar favor, and is in 
itself the " pleasant taste or sense of it." In short, 
it is a manifestation of the Spirit of adoption ; 



379 



an inward evidence of the love of God shed 
.abroad in our hearts ; an internal witness that 
we are born again. 

* After patient investigation of the subject 
(says Mr. H.), and from a consideration of the 
manner in which Mr. Wesley describes the direct 
witness, I must conclude, he meant nothing more 
than a text of scripture applied by the Spirit." 
(p. 139.) I answer, it is not for us to dictate to 
the. Holy Spirit which operates on our hearts. 
Sometimes this inward evidence arises from a pas* 
sage of scripture applied to the soul, and some- 
times from some truth correspondent therewith, 
and evidently cleducible from its principles : 
nothing but this can be applied by the Spirit. But 
whether a passage of scripture be made a medium 
of communication or not, the effect produced ig 
invariably the same. A light is imparted which 
was unseen before. A persuasion is also begot- 
ten, that condemnation is removed, that God i3 
reconciled to us through Jesus Christ, and hath 
again taken us into his favor. 

But Mr. H. adds, " We have no scriptural and 
rational marks by which we can distinguish them 
(direct testimonies) from mere suggestions of our 
own minds, or satanic illusions." (p. 140.) If this 
objection were founded in fact, I readily acknow- 
ledge that it would be fatal, not only to the 
direct witness, but also to every branch of ex- 
perimental religion. But to prove the assertion, 
will be found a more difficult task than to make it* 



330 



First, the true direct witness leads us to love God, 
and to yield an implicit obedience to his com- 
mandments. Secondly, it appeals with entire sub- 
mission to the written word, and ultimately abides 
by its dictates. Thirdly, it leads to holiness of 
heart and life. Whatever witness is not accom- 
panied w 7 ith these marks, we are fully assured is 
not the witness of the Spirit ; and whatever wit- 
ness has them, cannot be " destitute of scriptural 
and rational marks, by which it may be distin- 
guished from the mere suggestions of our own 
mind, or satanic illusions." 

Nor is this direct witness unnecessary, as Mr- H. 
has asserted, unless a direct manifestation of God's 
love towards us can be deemed so ; for this is the 
evidence of such a manifestation. It is an evi- 
dence which witnesses the love of God ; and whe- 
ther w T e suppose it to operate through an applica- 
tion of revealed truth, or by enlightening the un- 
derstanding to perceive w r hat was before inapplica- 
ble and concealed, still its existence must be re- 
cognised, though under different names. And 
wdren I know r that I have passed from death unto 
life, the fact itself must be brought into union 
with my spiritual powers by an evidence that is 
direct, in what stage soever it may be placed. 

If then this evidence, or direct witness, be possi- 
ble ; — if it be necessary ; — if it be consistent with 
scripture, and supported by reason; — if it manifest 
the Divine love towards us ; — if it tend to excite 
our love to God ; — if it be beneficial ; if it be 



381 



guarded by indubitable evidence, by which its 
genuine nature may be ascertained ; — if it lead to 
holiness of heart and life ; — if it be experienced 
by thousands ; — we dare not abandon it, because it 
has been denominated a " mock sun." That it 
answers these descriptions, I hope, I have made 
fully to appear ; and the blessed effects which have 
resulted the preaching and experience of this 

doctrine, may be found in the souls of those who 
now rejoice in the God of their salvation with joy 
unspeakable, and full of glory. 

With the sacred writings in our hands, this 
evidence in our hearts, and the calm dictates of 
sob^r sense on our side, we have nothing to 
fear from an appeal unto them. After the way 
which some call heresy, we have hitherto worship- 
ped the God of our Fathers ; and confiding in his 
protecting arm and assisting grace, we hope to 
persevere. Thus far we trust God has made us 
instrumental in his hand for much good. We trust 
also that he will still bless us more abundantly, and 
continue to crown our labours with increasing 
success, till having fought the good fight, and kept 
the faith, we shall finish our course with joy, and 
be for ever with the Lord. 

To Mr. Home, I impute no bad motive in his 
investigation of our principles ; but regret that he 
should have been betrayed into the use of so many 
unbecoming expressions ; and am surprised, that 
on some of the points in question he should not 
have better known our principles. That Mr. 



Home himself, and you, my beloved bre-* 
thren more especially, may enjoy every blessing of 
the covenant of the gospel of peace, and finally 
inherit that region where the sis;ht of the beatific 
vision shall leave no room for a diversity of 
opinions, are among the genuine ~° 'lies of my heart. 
With these hopes, prospects, and desires, I finally 
subscribe myself, 

My beloved Brethren in the Lord, 
Yours 

Affectionately and faithfully^ 
THOMAS COKE. 



THE END. 



A. Paris, Printer, Took's Court, 
Chancery Lane, London. 



Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: May 2006 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 
1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township, PA 16056 
(724) 779-21 1 1 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 




